Editorial
In Defence Of Oct 25, Gov Amaechi
When the framers of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution, as amended, opted for a multi-party system, the intention was to expand the minefield of political ideologies, alternative views and indeed foster healthy competition among Nigerian political platforms, upon which the country can depend for the electable representatives. To achieve that feat, the same constitution provided political parties with the necessary powers and quasi-sovereignty to conduct their internal affairs with little or no interference by the National Electoral Commission (INEC), the lawful body empowered to superintend election and elections matters in the land, and oversee activities of the parties.
So powerful, political parties even succeeded in preventing the judiciary from interfering in their internal crises, no matter the magnitude of threat such unlimited freedom posed to the fragile democracy, the Nigerian state was experimenting.
Undoubtedly, that seeming limitless power to decide on candidates for general elections brewed dangerous signals of undemocratic culture, as the choice of candidates at various times, depended on everything except merit and intra party democracy.
Their internal affairs with little or no interference by the National Electoral Commission (INEC), the lawful body empowered to superintend election and elections matters in the land, and oversee activities of the parties.
So powerful, political parties even succeeded in preventing the judiciary from interfering in their internal crises, no matter the magnitude of threat such unlimited freedom posed to the fragile democracy, the Nigerian state was experimenting.
Undoubtedly, that seeming limitless power to decide on candidates for general elections brewed dangerous signals of undemocratic culture, as the choice of candidates at various times, depended on everything except merit and intra party democracy.
It took what is now commonly referred to as the Amaechi re-instatement ruling of October 25, 2007 by the Supreme Court of Nigeria for parties to realise that the liberty to run their internal affairs were also limited by the religious adherence to intra-party democracy and indeed obedience to rules contained in their various party constitutions. Another is the fact that anytime such constitutions were observed in the breach, or when their provisions conflict with those of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the latter reigns supreme.
The Tide believes that the epochal Supreme Court judgement which restored Rt. Hon. Chibuikre Rotimi Amaechi’s mandate about five months after another had been sworn-in went beyond a personal victory. That ruling indeed, redefined Nigeria’s judicial courage and gallantry, defended fairness, equity and the rule of law, promoted intra-party democracy and most importantly, institutionalised enduring structures for punishment and reward in electoral matters.
To appreciate the value, import and indeed propriety of October 25, the history of how then Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly, Rt. Hon. Amaechi contested and won the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) governorship primaries as required by law; how he was denied the mandate to contest the April 14, 2007 election on account of the K-leg theory; how, despite his subsisting protest through the lower court to Appeal Court and to the Supreme Court, he was suspended from the party for seeking justice outside the party; how he was substituted with another candidate, even along the run of litigation, without cogent and verifiable reasons and finally, how Barr . Celestine Omehia was eventually declared winner of the general elections even if he did not contest the party’s primaries as prescribed by law, must be put in context and perspective.
More importantly, the Supreme Court ruling ended the familiar culture of impunity often demonstrated by dogmatic political party leaders and god –fathers who often imposed candidates, ‘win’ elections by hook or crook, get such rogue candidates endorsed by INEC and sworn-in, in belief that once such sponsored stooge takes oath of office, the resources of the state would be employed to defend the wrong, and make it look right at all cost.
In such instances, the best the judiciary was often left to do after identifying obvious flaws was to order fresh elections, which was the worst case scenario manipulators of Governor Amaechi’s mandate anticipated.
But in what has become a landmark judgement designed, among other things, to erect stronger reward structures in electoral matters, the Supreme Court ruled that by Amaechi’s unchallenged victory at the party’s primaries, and his eventual illegal substitution without cogent and verifiable reasons by INEC as required by law, whosoever contested the election on the PDP platform was an impostor or did so for and on behalf of Governor Amaechi. It then gave the order that he be sworn-in as elected governor of Rivers State.
The Tide would have considered this elaborate recall totally unnecessary if not for questions recently raised against the propriety of reliving events of October 25, 2007 as an important date in the state’s democratic calendar.
In fact, some politicians have argued that such annual observance had been over taken by events, for the singular reason that Governor Amaechi had since sought, earned and won re-election in 2011, which in their view, diminishes the 2007 redemption of his first mandate.
The Tide disagrees. Without the Supreme Court’s verdict, and considering the antecedent of political parties in punishing members who seek justice beyond the confines of existing intra-party disciplinary structures, Governor Amaechi’s second-term bid would have been more tortuous than the first. Infact, analysts insist without October 25, 2007 serving as check, Amaechi’s re-election as the PDP candidate would have been a mirage.
More importantly, going by the content of congratulatory messages sent to Governor Amaechi in the press by appreciative stakeholders of the Rivers project, what was celebrated was the conviction that without the October 25, 2007 Supreme Court ruling, the impressive developmental strides recorded by the Rivers government would have been unthinkable.
Such stakeholders variously pointed to landmark achievements in the areas of education, with the erection of more than 150 model primary schools, and more than10 state of the art secondary schools and still counting; health centres with countless modern health centres and world class referral centres, infrasturctural development, with roads, inter-changes fly-overs and bridges, and huge investment in agriculture, among many others. Without Amaechi, these many others and the recent recruitment and posting of more than 13,000 teachers would have been a pipe dream.
These are why The Tide joins other well-meaning Nigerians, especially lovers of enduring intra-party and inter-party democracy, to celebrate the gallantry of the nation’s apex court, for that historic judegment with Governor Amaechi merely the vessel for such justice delivery.
That in short was what the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Aloysius Kastina-Alu, meant in his lead ruling of October 25, 2007, when he said, ‘ “the justice of the case demands that this court do substantial justice. The only way to redress his right, which was violated by the illegal substitution, is to declare him the winner of the April 14 governorship election in Rivers State”.
This without a doubt is the right way to appreciate the import and potency of October 25, in the annals of our democratic experience, and not to diminish it simply in exercise of personal vendetta against the Rivers Governor.
The recent massacre in Yelewata, Benue State, ranks among Nigeria’s deadliest attacks of
2025. While official figures put the death toll at 59, media reports and Amnesty International estimate between 100 and 200 fatalities. This atrocity extends a decade-long pattern of violence in Nigeria’s Middle Belt, where Beacon Security data records 1,043 deaths in Benue alone between May 2023 and May 2025.
President Tinubu’s visit on 18 June—four days after the 14 June attack—has drawn sharp criticism for its lateness. This delay echoes a history of inadequate responses, with Human Rights Watch documenting similar inaction in Plateau and Kaduna states since 2013, fuelling a culture of impunity. The attack lasted over two hours without meaningful security intervention, despite claims of swift action.
The violence bore hallmarks of genocide, with survivors recounting systematic house burnings and executions. More than 2.2 million people have been displaced in the region since 2019 due to comparable attacks. Data show Benue’s agricultural output falls by 0.21 per cent in crops and 0.31 per cent in livestock for every 1 per cent rise in violence.
Security forces continue to underperform. No arrests were made following the Easter attacks in April (56 killed) or May’s Gwer West massacre (42 killed). During his visit, Tinubu questioned publicly why no suspects had been detained four days after Yelewata, highlighting entrenched accountability failures.
The roots of the conflict are complex, with climate change pushing northern herders south and 77 per cent of Benue’s population reliant on agriculture. A Tiv community leader described the violence as “calculated land-grabbing” rather than mere clashes, with over 500 deaths recorded since 2019.
Government interventions have largely fallen short. The 2018 federal task force and 2025 Forest Guards initiative failed to curb violence. Tinubu’s newly announced committee of ex-governors and traditional rulers has been met with scepticism given the litany of past unkept promises.
The economic fallout is severe. Benue’s status as Nigeria’s “food basket” is crumbling as farms are destroyed and farmers displaced. This worsens the nation’s food crisis, with hunger surges in 2023-2024 directly linked to farming disruptions caused by insecurity.
Citizens demanding justice have been met with force; protesters faced police tear gas, and the State Assembly conceded total failure in safeguarding lives, admitting that the governor, deputy, and 32 lawmakers had all neglected their constitutional responsibilities.
The massacre has drawn international condemnation. Pope Leo XIV decried the “terrible massacre,” while the UN called for an investigation. The hashtag “200 Nigerians” trended worldwide on X, with many contrasting Nigeria’s slow response to India’s swift action following a plane crash with similar fatalities.
Nigeria’s centralised security system is clearly overwhelmed. A single police force is tasked with covering 36 states and 774 local government areas for a population exceeding 200 million. Between 2021 and 2023 alone, 29,828 killings and 15,404 kidnappings were recorded nationally. Proposals for state police, floated since January 2025, remain stalled.
Other populous nations offer alternative models. Canada’s provincial police, India’s state forces, and Indonesia’s municipal units demonstrate the effectiveness of decentralised policing. Nigeria’s centralised structure creates intelligence and response gaps, worsened by the distance—both physical and bureaucratic—from Abuja to affected communities.
The immediate aftermath is dire: 21 IDP camps in Benue are overwhelmed, and a humanitarian crisis is deepening. The State Assembly declared three days of mourning (18-20 June), but survivors lack sufficient medical aid. Tragically, many of those killed were already displaced by earlier violence.
A lasting solution requires a multi-pronged approach, including targeted security deployment, regulated grazing land, and full enforcement of Benue’s 2017 Anti-Open Grazing Law. The National Economic Council’s failure to prioritise state police in May 2025 represents a missed chance for reform.
Without decisive intervention, trends suggest conditions will worsen. More than 20,000 Nigerians have been killed and 13,000 kidnapped nationwide in 2025 alone. As Governor Hyacinth Alia stressed during Tinubu’s visit, state police may be the only viable path forward. All 36 states have submitted proposals supporting decentralisation—a crucial step towards breaking Nigeria’s vicious cycle of violence.
Nigeria’s return to democratic rule in 1999 marked a watershed moment in the nation’s political history. After enduring nearly 16 years of successive military dictatorships, Nigerians embraced a new era of civil governance with the inauguration of President Olusegun Obasanjo on May 29, 1999. Since then, the country has sustained a democratic system for 26 years. But, this democratic journey has been a complex mix of progress and persistent challenges.
The formal recognition of June 12 as Democracy Day in 2018 by former President Muhammadu Buhari acknowledged a long-standing injustice. The annulment of the 1993 presidential election, Nigeria’s freest, betrayed the democratic aspirations of millions. That it took decades to honour this date reflects the nation’s complex relationship with its democratic memory.
One of the most momentous successes of Nigeria’s democracy has been the uninterrupted civilian rule over the last two and a half decades. The country has witnessed seven general elections, with power transferring peacefully among different political parties. This is particularly notable considering that prior to 1999, no civilian government had completed a full term without military intervention. The peaceful transitions in 2007, 2015, and 2023 are testaments to Nigeria’s evolving democratic maturity.
Electoral participation, while uneven, has also reflected a level of democratic engagement. In 2003, voter turnout stood at about 69 per cent, but this figure dropped to approximately 34.75 per cent in 2023, according to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Although the declining turnout raises concerns, it also highlights the increasing expectations of the electorate, who demand credible and transparent elections.
Another area of progress is the growth of a vibrant and free press. Nigerian media has played a crucial role in holding governments accountable and fostering public discourse. Investigative journalism and civil society activism have exposed corruption and human rights abuses. The rise of social media has further expanded the democratic space, enabling young Nigerians to mobilise and advocate for change, as evidenced by the 2020 #EndSARS protests.
Judicial independence has seen mixed results. On one hand, the judiciary has occasionally demonstrated resilience, such as in landmark rulings that overturned fraudulent elections or curtailed executive excesses. On the other hand, allegations of political interference and corruption within the judiciary persist, undermining public confidence in the legal system’s impartiality.
Nigeria’s democracy has also facilitated the decentralisation of power through the federal system. State governments now wield some autonomy, allowing for experimentation in governance and service delivery. While this has led to innovative policies in some states, it has also entrenched patronage networks and uneven development across the federation.
Despite these successes, Nigeria’s democratic journey faces formidable problems. Electoral integrity remains a critical concern. Reports from election observers, including those from the European Union and ECOWAS, frequently highlight issues such as vote-buying, ballot box snatching, and violence. The introduction of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) and electronic transmission of results in 2023 elections showed promise, but technical glitches and alleged manipulations dampened public trust.
Corruption continues to be a pervasive issue. Nigeria ranks 145th out of 180 countries on Transparency International’s 2023 Corruption Perceptions Index, with a score of 25/100. Democratic institutions meant to check graft—such as anti-corruption agencies and the legislature—often struggle due to political interference and weak enforcement mechanisms.
Security challenges have also strained Nigeria’s democracy. Insurgency in the North East, banditry in the North West, separatist agitations in the South East, and herder-farmer conflicts across the Middle Belt have collectively resulted in thousands of deaths and displacements. According to the Global Terrorism Index 2024, Nigeria ranks as the eighth most impacted country by terrorism. The government’s difficulty in ensuring safety erodes public confidence in the state’s capacity and legitimacy.
The economy poses another critical remonstrance. Nigeria’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita stands at approximately $2,400 as of 2024, with over 40 per cent of the population living below the national poverty line. High unemployment and inflation have fueled discontent and disillusionment with democratic governance, especially among youth. Without addressing economic grievances, the democratic dividend will remain elusive for many Nigerians.
Ethnic and religious divisions further complicate Nigeria’s democratic consolidation. Politicians often exploit identity politics for electoral gains, exacerbating social tensions. Although federal character principles aim to promote inclusiveness, they have also sometimes fostered a quota mentality rather than merit-based appointments.
Gender representation remains inadequate in Nigeria’s democratic institutions. Women occupy less than 10 per cent of seats in the National Assembly, one of the lowest rates globally. Efforts to pass gender parity bills have faced stiff resistance, highlighting deep-seated cultural and institutional barriers to female political participation.
Civil liberties, while constitutionally guaranteed, are under threat. Crackdowns on protesters, restrictions on press freedom, and surveillance of activists reveal an authoritarian streak within the democratic framework. The controversial Twitter ban in 2021 exemplified the country’s willingness to curb digital freedoms, prompting domestic and international criticism.
The political crisis in Rivers State embodies broader democratic struggles. Attempts to control the state through undemocratic means expose weaknesses in federal institutions and the rule of law. Immediate restoration of democratic governance in Rivers State is vital to preserving Nigeria’s democratic integrity and institutional credibility.
Local governments remain under the control of state governors, depriving citizens of grassroots democracy. Last year’s Supreme Court judgment on local government autonomy is promising, but state-level resistance threatens its implementation. Genuine autonomy would bring governance closer to the people and foster democratic innovation.
As we mark Democracy Day, we must honour the sacrifices of Chief M.K.O. Abiola, Kudirat Abiola, Femi Falana, Chief Gani Fawehinmi, Pa Alfred Rewane, President Bola Tinubu, and countless others, who fought for Nigeria’s freedom. As democracy in Nigeria continues to evolve after 26 years, this day should inspire action toward its renewal. With despotism and state failure as real threats, both citizens and leaders must take responsibility—citizens by demanding more, and leaders by delivering. Excuses are no longer acceptable.