Editorial
Buhari, National Interest And Rule Of Law
Recently, President Muhammadu Buhari was reported to have, while flagging off the 2018 Annual General Conference of the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) in Abuja, announced that his administration was considering raising public interest and national security above the rule of law.
“Our apex court has had cause to adopt a position on this issue in this regard and it is now a matter of judicial recognition that where national and public interests are threatened, or there is a likelihood of their being threatened, the individual rights of those allegedly responsible must take second place in favour of the greater good of the society,” Buhari was quoted to have said.
Though the President did not give specific instances of how his government intends to draw the line between public interest and national security, the media had lately been awash with reactions occasioned by his speech at the NBA confab. Recall that the Attorney General of the Federation and Justice Minister, Abubakar Malami, had earlier adduced reasons why the Buhari administration could not release the detained former National Security Adviser, Col. Sambo Dasuki (rtd), despite court orders to that effect.
The Tide is dismayed by the President’s speech as it is not only worrisome but also unacceptable, especially if we consider that it is coming just a few months before the 2019 general elections. It is rather unfortunate that the President, as an individual, or perhaps in consultation with his motley crew of advisers, would be the sole determinant of what constitutes national interest/security.
It is our candid position that the courts (Judiciary) be allowed to interpret or draw the line between national interest/security and fundamental human rights of the citizens. The present situation where the government speedily executes favourable court judgments but trumps up security concerns only when it suffers embarrassing legal defeats simply smacks of brazen judicial contempt and executive rascality.
Our submission is premised on the understanding that Mr. President, being human, may have his prejudices over certain persons and issues which could affect his judgement in matters bordering on individual rights and national interest. While we concede that his office is enormously endowed with state powers, going by the 1999 Federal Constitution (as amended), it is also granted that the same document duly recognises the natural and fundamental rights of the citizens. More so, Nigeria is a signatory to the International Human Rights Treaty which unequivocally recognises the natural rights of individuals, especially in a democracy.
One of the most respected legal minds to comment on Buhari’s claim, Chief Mike Ozehkome (SAN), was reported to have countered thus: “He (President Buhari) is dead wrong. The rule of law predominates over national interest. Without the rule of law, there can be no nation-state. Without a nation-state, there can be no national interest. The rule of law is the father of national interest.”
There have also been suggestions that Buhari’s controversial claim, judging from experiences all over the world, particularly in Africa, points to the antics usually employed by despots to perpetuate themselves in power by incarcerating their critics and vocal members of the opposition. The suspicions seem to have been stoked by the President’s body language since assuming office in 2015, especially his refusal to obey court orders over Dasuki; arbitrary arrest and detention of newsmen; detention of sectarian leaders like El-Zak Zaky without trial; shooting of pro-Biafra agitators; and the Gestapo-style midnight raid of some judges’ residences across the country.
We understand that the President made a volte face last Friday, on account of the massive criticism that trailed his comment, but that could also be because a serious election season stares him in the face. And this is, therefore, no time for any unpopular claims.
Nigeria is a democratic state and the political class must learn to tolerate the opposition because that largely determines democratic sustenance. They must strive to imbibe democratic values, norms and ethos in line with international best practices if the country’s nascent democracy is to endure.
Editorial
Champions At Last: Well Done, Flamingos
Editorial
Kula Tragedy, Needless Loss Of Lives
Editorial
INEC’s Threat Alert Deserves Urgent Attention
The Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) disclosure of an alleged plot to target its ad hoc personnel ahead of the 2027 general elections demand urgent national attention. The reported arrest of suspects, with intelligence support from the Department of State Services (DSS), is encouraging, but must not breed complacency. Any attack on electoral workers threatens not only human lives but also Nigerians’ constitutional right to choose their leaders through credible elections. The alleged conspiracy must be thoroughly investigated, its sponsors identified and all those found culpable prosecuted.
Particularly troubling is the reported targeting of National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) members, who play a vital role in Nigeria’s electoral process. Many serve far from home and undertake sensitive assignments at polling units and other electoral locations. As civilians, they should not be exposed to intimidation, abduction or violence without adequate protection. If election workers are vulnerable, the safety of other officials, observers and voters cannot be guaranteed.
Nigeria’s electoral history offers painful lessons. Human Rights Watch reported in Nigeria’s Post-Election Violence, published in May 2011, that more than 800 people died in the violence following the 2011 general elections. NYSC members serving as electoral officials were among the victims. This tragedy underscores the deadly consequences of political tension, incitement and disputed outcomes. Nigeria must act on the latest warning before another preventable disaster occurs.
INEC deserves recognition for uncovering the alleged plot, while the DSS and other security agencies merit commendation for their reported assistance. However, arrests are only the beginning. Investigators must establish the suspects’ identities, motives, networks and intended targets, ensuring that evidence is admissible in court. The process must remain impartial and free from political interference. Credible public updates are also necessary, provided they do not compromise investigations or operational security.
The authorities must adopt a comprehensive, intelligence-led security strategy for 2027. INEC’s proposed security conference should produce practical measures developed in collaboration with the Inter-Agency Consultative Committee on Election Security (ICCES), the police, the DSS and other relevant agencies. Threat assessments should guide personnel deployment, secure transportation, emergency communications, evacuation procedures and rapid response. Protection must extend beyond polling day to the distribution of sensitive materials, collation centres and the safe return of ad hoc personnel.
Those who provide intelligence must also be protected from retaliation. Confidential reporting channels and appropriate safeguards should be established for informants and others assisting investigations. Equally, security deployments must not intimidate voters or facilitate political repression. Personnel should act professionally, impartially and proportionately, within the law. Clear mechanisms for reporting misconduct and investigating abuses are essential to maintaining public confidence.
The threat also highlights broader concerns about trust in the electoral system. The European Union Election Observation Mission’s June 2023 final report identified shortcomings in transparency and operational implementation during Nigeria’s 2023 general elections, alongside concerns about the legal framework and electoral dispute resolution. Credible elections require more than security; they depend on transparent procedures, accountable officials and consistent enforcement of electoral laws. INEC must demonstrate measurable progress in addressing previously identified weaknesses.
Voter apathy presents another challenge. INEC’s published figures indicate that approximately 25 million people voted in the 2023 presidential election, out of about 93.5 million registered voters, a turnout of roughly 26.7 per cent. Although insecurity is not the sole cause of low participation, threats against electoral personnel can heighten public anxiety and discourage voters from exercising their franchise. INEC should strengthen civic education, improve polling accessibility and communicate procedures clearly. Political parties, civil society and the media must promote peaceful participation and reject electoral intimidation.
Misinformation and manipulated digital content pose additional risks. False reports, fabricated announcements and deepfake videos can inflame tensions, impersonate officials and mislead voters. INEC should establish a well-resourced, rapid-response communication system supported by verified digital channels and timely public statements. Collaboration with credible media organisations and fact-checkers would help counter falsehoods without suppressing legitimate criticism. Clear, consistent communication is indispensable, as administrative confusion and delayed explanations often allow rumours to spread.
Electoral integrity must also begin within INEC itself. The chairman’s warning against partisanship, negligence, extortion and ethical misconduct deserves serious attention. Security measures cannot compensate for officials who abuse their positions or disregard established procedures. INEC should strengthen staff training, ensure transparent recruitment and deployment, provide secure channels for reporting misconduct and enforce disciplinary rules consistently. Allegations of bribery and political interference must be investigated regardless of rank, while ad hoc personnel should receive adequate briefing, support and prompt payment.
The legal framework also requires clarity and consistent enforcement. INEC should explain the precise provisions and applicability of Section 26 of the Electoral Act 2026, including the obligations of electoral officials and security personnel, and publish authoritative guidance on neutrality and professional conduct. Complaints by opposition parties that they have been prevented from campaigning in certain states must likewise be investigated impartially. Any established violations should attract appropriate corrective action. Electoral fairness requires not only impartial polling officials but also lawful campaigning, access to competing viewpoints and freedom from intimidation.
The alleged plot against INEC’s ad hoc personnel is a warning against complacency ahead of the 2027 general election. Governments, security agencies, INEC, political parties and civil society must work together to prevent violence, punish misconduct and protect citizens’ participation. The commission should communicate its security priorities, maintain accessible threat-reporting channels and provide periodic updates on preparedness. Nigeria’s democracy cannot be safeguarded by assurances alone; it requires demonstrable preparation, impartial law enforcement and an unwavering commitment to free, fair and credible elections.
-
Politics2 days agoLG CITY BOY COORDINATOR HAILS WIKE’S SUPPORT FOR ONYESOH, TINUBU
-
Politics2 days ago
DIRI INAUGURATES APC CAMPAIGN COUNCIL, SETS MILLION VOTES TARGET FOR TINUBU
-
Politics2 days agoNDC Candidate Urges Oborevwori To Probe Asaba Political Violence
-
Rivers5 days ago
NUJ Set To Attend UNIPORT’s 217th Inaugural Lecture
-
News2 days agoArmy Recovers X Account After Hack Attempt
-
News5 days agoNJC Suspends Three Judges, Sanctions Eight Others
-
Politics5 days ago
Atiku Kicks-Off 2027 Campaign, Promises To Tackle Nigeria’s Challenges
-
Featured5 days agoAPC Presidential Campaign Storms PH, ‘Morrow
