Why responsible journalism, credible evidence, and institutional accountability must guide Nigeria’s democratic discourse
By Olusegun B. Abejide
Seun Okinbaloye, your recent televised commentary on Nigeria’s forthcoming 2027 general elections raises a fundamental question about journalism’s responsibilities in a politically sensitive society. Your assertion that electoral manipulation has already begun and that the 2027 election is effectively rigged unless Nigerians intervene immediately deserves careful examination. Not because electoral malpractice is impossible, nor because the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) should be protected from criticism, but because serious public allegations must be distinguished from conclusions that have been conclusively established.
As a respected television journalist whose commentary reaches millions of Nigerians, your words carry considerable influence. They can stimulate necessary public scrutiny, encourage institutional accountability, and expose weaknesses in electoral administration. Equally, statements delivered without sufficient qualification can deepen suspicion, generate public anxiety, and undermine confidence in democratic institutions before their actions have been fully examined.
The question, therefore, is not whether journalists should investigate electoral manipulation. They absolutely should. The question is whether the evidence available justifies declaring that an election yet to take place has already been rigged.
*Electoral Manipulation Can Begin Before Election Day*
Let me acknowledge an important aspect of your argument. Elections are not necessarily manipulated only when citizens arrive at polling stations. Electoral integrity can be compromised months or even years before voting begins.
Manipulation may occur through fraudulent voter registration, intimidation, interference with candidate selection, unlawful campaign financing, abuse of public resources, administrative obstruction, or deliberate attempts to weaken electoral oversight. These activities can distort democratic competition long before ballots are counted.
Consequently, your warning that Nigerians should pay attention to the processes before election day is legitimate and worth considering.
However, acknowledging that electoral manipulation can begin early does not automatically establish that a particular election has already been rigged.
A substantial difference exists between identifying circumstances that create opportunities for electoral malpractice and demonstrating that those opportunities produced a coordinated scheme capable of determining an election’s outcome.
The former calls for vigilance. The latter requires credible, specific, and verifiable evidence.
That distinction should remain central to responsible political commentary.
*The Controversy Surrounding the Voters’ Register*
Your remarks emerged amid public concern about questionable entries in INEC’s preliminary voters’ register, including allegations involving duplicate registrations, underage voters, and suspicious photographs.
These concerns deserve serious attention. A credible voters’ register is indispensable to electoral integrity because it establishes who is eligible to participate in the democratic process.
Reports indicate that INEC acknowledged irregular entries and that its biometric identification system helped detect questionable records. The commission subsequently made the preliminary register available for public inspection and announced continuing verification and correction procedures before final certification.
This raises important questions.
How did questionable entries enter the registration system? Did administrative mistakes, technological weaknesses, individual misconduct, or organized manipulation cause them? How many records were affected? What corrective measures have been implemented? Have those responsible for any deliberate wrongdoing been identified?
These are legitimate questions that investigative journalists should pursue.
Nevertheless, irregular entries in a preliminary register do not, by themselves, establish that the forthcoming general election has already been rigged.
A preliminary register is subject to verification and correction. Whether the identified irregularities ultimately compromise the election depends on their nature, extent, and the effectiveness of the corrective measures taken.
The public deserves a rigorous investigation, not premature reassurance or condemnation.
*Seun, What Exactly Has Been Established?*
Your statement appears to move from warning about possible electoral manipulation to announcing an outcome that has not yet occurred.
That movement is the central concern of my criticism.
If you possess evidence demonstrating that individuals or institutions are deliberately manipulating the electoral process, the public deserves to know what that evidence establishes.
Who is responsible for the alleged activities? What methods are being employed? What documents, investigative findings, or independently verified records support the allegations? Which electoral safeguards have failed, and which remain capable of preventing or correcting the suspected wrongdoing?
These questions are not attempts to silence journalism. They are precisely the questions that distinguish investigative reporting from political speculation.
A journalist may reasonably warn that existing irregularities could undermine an election. But declaring that the election has already been rigged introduces a conclusion that demands additional substantiation.
Words matter, particularly when spoken by individuals whose professional credibility encourages audiences to treat their observations as authoritative.
*The El-Rufai Telephone Interception Controversy*
Your comment reminds me of another controversial public statement involving former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai and Nigeria’s National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu.
During an interview on Arise Television in February 2026, El-Rufai claimed that someone had intercepted Ribadu’s telephone conversation and that he had heard the National Security Adviser allegedly directing security operatives to arrest him.
The statement attracted considerable public attention because it involved the alleged interception of communications belonging to a senior national security official.
The federal government subsequently filed charges against El-Rufai concerning the alleged unlawful interception. Those allegations became the subject of legal proceedings, and criminal charges should not be confused with a judicial determination of guilt.
I recall this incident not to suggest that your statement and El-Rufai’s allegation constitute equivalent conduct. They plainly involve different circumstances and different legal considerations.
Rather, both incidents illustrate how consequential public assertions can become when prominent individuals speak about matters affecting national institutions.
El-Rufai’s allegation raised questions about the evidence supporting his account, the circumstances surrounding the alleged interception, and the legal implications of unauthorized access to private communications.
Similarly, your electoral warning raises questions about the evidence supporting your conclusion and the implications of presenting suspected manipulation as an established electoral reality.
The common principle is straightforward: the greater the potential public consequences of an allegation, the greater the responsibility to explain its factual foundation.
Prominence does not eliminate accountability. It increases the importance of exercising it.
*Journalism Must Investigate Without Prejudging*
Responsible journalism occupies a distinctive position in democratic society.
Journalists are neither government spokespersons nor judicial authorities. They must investigate matters of public interest, examine competing explanations, challenge official narratives, and provide citizens with reliable information.
This responsibility includes exposing electoral misconduct whenever credible evidence supports such reporting.
It also requires distinguishing between an allegation, an investigative finding, and a conclusion established through sufficient evidence.
A journalist who discovers irregularities in the voters’ register should report them clearly. If credible evidence indicates deliberate manipulation, that evidence should be examined and disclosed responsibly.
Where the evidence remains incomplete, journalists should acknowledge uncertainty rather than conceal it.
Such caution does not weaken journalism. It protects its credibility.
A democratic society benefits when journalists challenge powerful institutions. But that benefit depends upon maintaining professional standards that allow citizens to distinguish facts from interpretations and predictions.
Journalistic independence must therefore operate alongside journalistic accountability.
*The Danger of Premature Electoral Conclusions*
Nigeria’s democratic history has included disputed elections, allegations of malpractice, judicial challenges, and recurring disagreements about electoral administration.
These experiences help explain why many Nigerians approach electoral institutions with skepticism.
Public distrust should not be dismissed. It must be addressed through transparent administration, effective oversight, credible investigations, and lawful remedies.
Nevertheless, declaring an election rigged before voting begins may lead some citizens to believe participation has become meaningless.
Such a conclusion could discourage civic engagement, intensify partisan suspicion, or contribute to public tension.
These are potential consequences, not inevitable outcomes. Equally, suppressing legitimate warnings about electoral irregularities could allow serious misconduct to continue unchecked.
Public commentators must therefore strike a careful balance between exposing genuine risks and avoiding conclusions that outrun the available evidence.
Nigerians should be encouraged to inspect the voters’ register, report suspicious entries, demand explanations from INEC, observe electoral procedures, and insist upon lawful accountability.
These actions are more constructive than treating the election’s eventual credibility as a question already settled.
*INEC Must Also Answer the Difficult Questions*
My criticism of your statement should not be interpreted as an endorsement of INEC’s conduct or an attempt to excuse irregularities.
The electoral commission bears substantial responsibility for maintaining an accurate register and administering elections according to the law.
If unauthorized or questionable records entered its database, Nigerians deserve a transparent explanation of how that happened.
The commission should disclose the nature and extent of identified irregularities, explain its verification procedures, and communicate the corrective actions taken before final certification.
Where deliberate misconduct is established, appropriate accountability measures should follow.
Transparency must be demonstrable, not merely promised.
At the same time, allegations against INEC should be assessed against the evidence available. Institutional accountability and evidentiary fairness are complementary principles, not competing ones.
A commission should not escape scrutiny because it occupies an official position. Its actions should not be conclusively condemned without adequate investigation.
The objective must remain the same: an electoral process that citizens can examine, question, and evaluate based on verifiable facts.
*The Responsibility of Influential Public Figures*
Seun, you occupy a position that allows you to influence national conversations. That privilege comes with an obligation to exercise professional judgment, especially when addressing issues that can provoke strong political emotions.
A statement that an election may be vulnerable to manipulation invites investigation and corrective action.
A statement that the election has already been rigged communicates something considerably more definitive.
The difference is not trivial.
Public commentators should understand that audiences may interpret categorical language literally, especially when the subject concerns political legitimacy.
If you meant to warn that irregularities in the registration process could compromise the 2027 election unless corrected, you can state that clearly without implying the final electoral outcome has already been determined.
Indeed, a carefully qualified warning may prove more persuasive because it directs attention toward identifiable problems and practical remedies.
Precision is not an obstacle to courageous journalism. It is one of its essential instruments.
*A Call for Evidence, Clarity, and Democratic Responsibility*
Nigeria’s democracy deserves both vigilant journalists and accountable electoral institutions.
Citizens should never be discouraged from questioning electoral procedures, demanding transparency, or exposing credible evidence of wrongdoing.
But public confidence must not be undermined through assertions whose evidentiary basis remains unclear.
Seun, I therefore invite you to explain precisely what you intended by your statement that the 2027 election is already rigged.
If you were referring to identified irregularities in the preliminary voters’ register, explain how those irregularities support your conclusion. If you have additional evidence of deliberate manipulation, clarify what it establishes and what corrective action is necessary.
This challenge is not meant to diminish your professional standing. It is to insist upon the same accountability that journalists rightly demand from public officials.
The El-Rufai telephone interception controversy demonstrates how serious public allegations can generate institutional, legal, and political consequences. Your electoral commentary likewise illustrates why influential statements deserve scrutiny, even when their underlying concerns are legitimate.
Nigeria cannot afford electoral malpractice. Neither can it afford a public discourse in which suspicion is routinely presented as fact.
The country needs independent journalism, transparent electoral administration, responsible political leadership, and citizens who remain engaged rather than resigned.
Ultimately, democracy is protected neither by unquestioning confidence in institutions nor by automatic distrust of everything they do.
It is protected through evidence, vigilance, lawful accountability, and the willingness to correct wrongdoing wherever it is found.
*Seun, investigate relentlessly, question courageously, and warn Nigerians whenever the evidence demands it. But do not allow the urgency of a warning to obscure the distinction between an election under threat and an election already proven to have been rigged.*
That distinction is essential to journalism’s credibility and the integrity of Nigeria’s democratic future.
Dear readers, we really need your support to keep on serving you with authoritative, truthful, and juicy stories everyday. For your support, please reach out to the editor @gavelinternational66@gmail.com
