Opposition political parties, ethnic youth leaders and civil society groups have called on President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to make the recently concluded Osun State governorship election a benchmark for the 2027 general elections.
The groups also passed a unanimous vote of confidence in President Tinubu, the Prof. Joash Amupitan-led INEC leadership and the heads of Nigeria’s security agencies for their roles and efforts in ensuring what they described as a free and credible election in Osun State.
They described the Osun governorship election as a significant victory for democracy and credible elections, declaring that the outcome demonstrated that Nigeria could still organise competitive elections in which voters were allowed to freely express their choices.
The groups comprised opposition political parties, the Arewa Consultative Youth Movement, Ohanaeze Youth Movement, Middle Belt Youth Forum, Oduduwa Consultative Youth Movement, the PBAT Door-to-Door Movement and the African Centre for Justice and Human Rights (ACJHR).
The groups, which participated in or monitored the electoral process, however, challenged the federal government and INEC to ensure that the standard witnessed in Osun did not remain an isolated development but became the foundation for an even more credible 2027 general election.
Speaking at a press conference in Abuja on Thursday on their assessment of the election, the groups, through the National Chairman of the Action Peoples Party (APP), High Chief Uchenna Nnadi, said the significance of the Osun poll went beyond the victory or defeat of individual political parties and candidates.
They singled out INEC, its chairman, Prof. Joash Amupitan, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the heads of the security agencies and the people of Osun State for their contributions to what they described as a peaceful and credible electoral process.
According to them, the real test of any election was whether citizens could vote without intimidation and have their choices respected.
They said the Osun experience had strengthened confidence in Nigeria’s democratic process and offered important lessons ahead of the 2027 elections.
The groups reserved special commendation for INEC and its Chairman, Prof. Joash Amupitan, saying the commission’s conduct in Osun had demonstrated the importance of an electoral umpire operating with independence and integrity.
They said the credibility of an election depended largely on the ability of the electoral commission to resist political pressure and allow voters to determine the outcome.
“The most important achievement of any election is not necessarily who wins or who loses. It is whether the people believe that they had a genuine opportunity to determine their leadership through the ballot,” they said.
According to them, the Osun election had helped strengthen that confidence by creating an environment in which voters could exercise their constitutional rights and have their votes counted.
They described INEC as an impartial referee whose responsibility was not to determine winners but to establish the conditions under which the electorate could freely determine the outcome.
The groups consequently hailed Amupitan for what they described as his courage and integrity and urged him to consolidate the gains of the Osun election.
“Mr chairman, you have demonstrated through the Osun election that the credibility of an electoral institution ultimately depends on the courage, independence and integrity with which its leadership performs its constitutional responsibilities,” they said.
They further described the INEC chairman as a “new democratic hero” following the Osun exercise, while urging him not to rest on the achievement.
Rather, they demanded that the lessons from Osun be institutionalised and replicated in subsequent elections across the country.
The opposition parties and youth leaders also commended President Bola Ahmed Tinubu for what they described as the federal government’s decision to provide a level playing field for political parties during the election.
They argued that democracy required more than the mere conduct of periodic elections, insisting that those in power must demonstrate the political maturity to allow citizens to freely choose their leaders, even where the outcome might not favour the ruling party.
