President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s renewed call for issue-based campaigns and rejection of ethnic and religious politics has raised hopes that the 2027 election could be conducted with less tension and violence, although political analysts say the President’s recent rhetoric has sent mixed signals.
Tinubu, represented by George Akume, Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), at the signing of the Peace Accord by presidential candidates in Abuja, urged political parties and their candidates to place national interest above personal and partisan ambitions as campaigns formally commenced.
The accord, organised by the National Peace Committee in partnership with The Kukah Centre, came against the backdrop of growing political rivalry ahead of the 2027 presidential election.
‘Let us campaign on superior ideas. Let us debate issues and promote the best policies to expand opportunities for our people,’ Tinubu said.
He also declared that elections were ‘not a do-or-die affair’, urging politicians to reject violence, hate speech, misinformation and incitement, including the manipulation of public opinion through artificial intelligence and social media.
However, the President’s latest position has been contrasted with some of his earlier comments, particularly his combative language about the contest for the 2027 presidency. While responding to concerns over insecurity, Tinubu had described himself as a ‘very stubborn politician’ who would not quit, insisting that he would campaign for a second term.
Similarly, on July 28, while receiving the Catholic Bishops Conference of Nigeria at the Presidential Villa, he said he would ‘wrestle’ political opponents ‘to the finishing point’ in the 2027 contest.
Analysts say the apparent shift in tone could be significant if translated into the conduct of the ruling party and its supporters during the campaign.
Martins Onovo, former presidential candidate, has described Tinubu’s call for issue-based campaigns and rejection of ethnic and religious sentiments ahead of the 2027 election as ‘deceitful’, arguing that it contradicts the President’s earlier combative rhetoric.
Onovo told BusinessDay that Tinubu’s latest position would only reassure Nigerians if matched by concrete action from the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC).
‘What Tinubu said is political; he didn’t mean it. His comments are deceitful. He has consistently been deceitful with his performance and clearly deceitful with his campaign promises. Now this is another deceit,’ he said.
According to him, Tinubu, as leader of the ruling party, must accept responsibility for the conduct of APC members and supporters during the election season.
‘His party is the most violent party in the country,’ Onovo alleged. He cited the controversy surrounding ‘killing’ comments by an APC senator during the recently concluded Osun governorship election. ‘Is this democracy?’ he asked.
Similarly, Jackson Lekan Ojo, political analyst and former member of both the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and the APC, also questioned the credibility of Tinubu’s peace appeal, particularly in light of his previous statements about fighting to retain power.
Ojo told BusinessDay in a telephone interview that the President would seek victory ‘by all means necessary’, within and outside the law, while stressing that Tinubu’s earlier comments were inconsistent with the message delivered at the Peace Accord.
‘That is the President of Nigeria. He has said they are going to battle to the finish. He said you have to drag it, collect it by force and run away with it,’ Ojo said.
‘How can the leader of a nation, the largest black nation on earth, say, ‘I am a stubborn politician’, and recently boast that he will fight to the finish? How can somebody be reprobating and approbating at the same time?’
Ojo also questioned Tinubu’s absence from the Peace Accord signing, saying Vice President Kashim Shettima, as the President’s running mate, would have been a more appropriate representative.
Chekwas Okorie, former presidential candidate and elder statesman, said Tinubu’s latest statement was welcomed but insufficient to erase concerns created by his earlier remarks.
Okorie told BusinessDay that presidential speeches delivered spontaneously often reveal the mindset of the speaker more than prepared statements.
‘Most of the threatening statements and inciting statements he has made came off-the-cuff. And that is when you know the main mindset of a person, be he President or an individual,’ he said.
He said Tinubu’s decision not to personally attend the Peace Accord was also ‘not encouraging’, given the symbolic importance of the event. According to Okorie, the President’s earlier statement that he would ‘fight to finish’ could influence his aides and supporters to adopt increasingly aggressive rhetoric.
‘His own allies, his aides, take the cue from him, and they take the thing a bit further, to even be more acerbic,’ Okorie said. He urged all political actors, including those working for the President, to tone down their rhetoric, warning that Nigeria’s political environment was becoming increasingly volatile.
‘I would like to see a campaign that will be issue-based,’ he said. The elder statesman urged politicians to allow voters to judge competing policies rather than personalities.
Similarly, Bernard Mikko, political scientist and former federal lawmaker, said Nigerians had become increasingly skeptical of political promises and statements, making it difficult for politicians to command public trust.
Mikko told BusinessDay that the credibility crisis surrounding political actors meant Nigerians were increasingly relying on themselves rather than politicians to protect their electoral interests.
‘Over the years, Nigerians have become so cynical and skeptical about pronouncements of politicians. They no longer take politicians seriously,’ he said.
He urged voters to concentrate on making their votes count rather than being intimidated by inflammatory statements from politicians. ‘Nigerians should not be bothered about those intimidating them or making promises. They should be more concerned about making their votes count and creating a better Nigeria which they deserve,’ Mikko said.
APC defends Tinubu
But Alhaji Bala Ibrahim, APC National Director of Publicity, defended Tinubu, saying the President’s earlier comments about fighting political opponents should not be interpreted as a call for physical violence.
Ibrahim told BusinessDay that political contests could legitimately be described as fights without implying the use of weapons or unlawful force.
‘When we say elections are fights, we are not saying they are fights with bullets. They are fights with ballots and there is nothing wrong with this kind of fight in a democratic system,’ he said, clarifying that such language was figurative.
‘Lawyers fight in the courtroom, but they fight with legal authority. They don’t fight with punches,’ Ibrahim added.
He said Tinubu expects a free, fair and violence-free election and would not simply surrender to opponents, insisting that whoever wins must do so through legitimate democratic means. ‘It’s not as if he is calling for violence, or he is going to use any underhand means in order for him to retain his position. We are expecting this election to be free and fair,’ he said.
Ibrahim said the 2027 contest could be particularly significant because the leading presidential contenders-Tinubu, Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi-were all civilian politicians with democratic credentials.
Against this backdrop, Tinubu’s Peace Accord message has opened a fresh debate over whether his administration can translate its promise of peaceful, issue-based politics into the conduct of the ruling party and its supporters.
Joash Amupitan, Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), described the Peace Accord as more than a ceremonial exercise, saying it was an attempt to establish ethical boundaries before the campaign season.
‘Electoral contests in a constitutional democracy are not total wars; they are competitive job interviews before the electorate. Nigerians do not want insults; they want solutions,’ Amupitan said.
With ethnic and religious sentiments, hate speech, misinformation and political violence capable of influencing voter behaviour and electoral outcomes, the credibility of the 2027 peace pledge will ultimately depend on whether political actors can restrain their supporters and allow voters to choose freely on the basis of competing ideas and policies.