2027: Nigerians speak against militarised elections, warn against voter intimidation

Ahead of the general election in 2027, Nigerians have urged the Federal Government to consider reducing the presence of combat-ready security personnel near polling units and streets to enable citizens go out and vote without fear of intimidation.

It has been observed over the years that heavy presence of various classes of security agents, sometimes, including the military, has scared away prospective voters.

Observers say that most times, the heavy presence of security agents does not check electoral violence or fraud, but ends up preventing many people from going out to exercise their franchise.

Over the years, the deployment of heavy security personnel to polling units has always been justified as a necessary step to deter violence, protect electoral officials, and reassure voters.

But observers say the increasing presence of armed personnel has not only failed to eliminate election-day violence in many areas but has also contributed to voter anxiety and reduced participation at the polls.

In several communities where elections have been held under tight security formations, voters describe a climate of tension and intimidation rather than safety.

While security agencies and the electoral umpire maintain that their presence is meant to safeguard the process, critics argue that the optics and conduct of some personnel have had unintended consequences.

Many Nigerians believe that in several cases, the security officials deployed at polling units during elections are excessive and often aid electoral manipulation by desperate politicians.

This is because in several instances, election results have been manipulated by political touts and hoodlums who intimidate voters even in the full glare of security officials.

“I don’t believe militarising the polling units has helped. Do we even have enough security officials to police all the polling units across Nigeria?

“The solution is to introduce electronic voting into the system and results collation process to rely less on human handling,” Lola Odekunle, a political analyst, told BusinessDay.

Citing instances in the recently conducted Edo State gubernatorial election, the analyst stated that apart from scaring potential voters away, experience has shown that in several elections, security officials are often used to intimidate voters and manipulate election outcomes.

“We saw the role they played in the Edo State gubernatorial election outcome. No one can forget that easily,” he added.

Francis Alaye, a trained psychologist, said that while it may not be out of place to draft security personnel to keep the peace during elections, there have been cases where the personnel liaised with government officials to intimidate voters in opposition strongholds.

“In some states, particularly those states that are not governed by a party at the centre, the mentality of security personnel drafted to such places during off-cycle elections is always questionable. In fact, they do many questionable things. When you see armed security personnel parading in scary format, in what they term ‘show of force’, you can read in-between lines that they are there for something other than peaceful exercise,” Alaye said.

Some Nigerians have said that the presence of heavily armed operatives at polling units often creates an atmosphere of intimidation

“Some citizens said they chose to stay away entirely, fearing possible confrontation or harassment. In the last election, I was not really keen to come out based on experience from the past, but when I saw the number of armed officers around the polling unit, I turned back because I felt uncomfortable,” a Lagos resident, who did not want his name in print, said.

The resident further pointed out that the situation has resulted in polling units looking more like police or military checkpoints than voting centres.

However, Emmanuel Enok, a public affairs commentator, argued that without security officials, elections in Nigeria could be more violent.

He stressed that heavy security at election centres should continue until democracy matures in the country.

“Our election is still a do-or-die affair that requires these security officials to check desperate politicians. I know a few of them could be compromised, but that is not a reason to say they are too many,” he said.

Similarly, a young voter who did not want his name in print told BusinessDay that he refused to vote in the gubernatorial election in Lagos State in 2023 because the environment did not feel safe for ordinary people.

“There were too many armed men, and it was difficult to tell whether they were there to protect us or control us,” he said.

Despite these concerns, election authorities and security agencies have consistently defended the deployment strategy.

They argue that visible security is essential in a country where electoral violence has been recorded in previous cycles, including ballot box snatching, voter intimidation, and clashes between rival political groups.

A security official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, maintained that the presence of personnel is preventive rather than oppressive.

“Our mandate is to ensure order,” the official said.

“Without adequate security, there would be chaos. The aim is to create a secure environment where citizens can exercise their rights without fear.”

Hameed Muritala, an Ilorin-based communication and development practitioner, told BusinessDay that heavy security deployment treats the symptoms, not the cause.

According to him, violence is often driven by the desperation of politicians to win at all costs, owing to the high financial stakes tied to political office.

“As long as elections are seen as a ‘do-or-die’ affair, violence will persist regardless of security presence.

“There is also the issue of complicity among the security personnel deployed for electoral duty. They are often selective in enforcing the law, as they sometimes look away or are absent during critical times.

“This emboldens perpetrators who believe they can act without consequences. This erodes public trust in security personnel to guarantee their safety, leading to voter apathy,” Muritala said.

Speaking further, the expert noted that weak or nonexistent prosecution of electoral offenders is another factor, stressing that without consequences, electoral violence becomes a recurring anomaly.

“Until these issues are addressed, violence will continue to undermine elections, and voters will remain hesitant to participate,” he added.

Similarly, Dipo Oguntusi, a political analyst, argued that there is a need for proper intelligence gathering, while sponsors of violence should be investigated and apprehended.

The analyst further advocated for electronic voting systems in future elections, where people can vote from the comfort of their homes.

Civil society organisations monitoring elections say the reality on ground often differs from this objective.

They point out that while security presence can deter overt acts of violence in some areas, it does not necessarily eliminate the underlying triggers of electoral conflict.

In some cases, they argue, it merely shifts the dynamics or displaces incidents to less-monitored locations.

A policy analyst explained that the effectiveness of security deployment depends not only on numbers but also on conduct, training, and coordination.

“Heavy security alone is not a solution,” the analyst noted. “When poorly managed, it can become counterproductive by creating fear among voters.

“What we need is professional, community-sensitive policing, not just a visible show of force.”

Reports from election monitoring groups have also highlighted inconsistencies in how security personnel interact with voters.

While some units maintain disciplined and non-intrusive positions, others have been accused of interfering with the voting process or engaging in behaviour perceived as intimidating.

In certain instances, voters have reported being asked questions beyond standard identification checks or being delayed unnecessarily at polling points.

Although such cases may not be widespread, their cumulative effect, observers say, contributes to public distrust and discourages participation.

“People don’t just respond to policies; they respond to experiences and perceptions,” said a governance researcher. “If voters feel uneasy or intimidated, even if no direct violence occurs, turnout will likely be affected.”

What has been observed is that voter turnout trends in some elections have shown fluctuations that analysts partially attribute to security concerns, among other factors such as political apathy, logistics challenges, and distrust in the electoral system.

In areas where security presence is perceived as excessive, turnout has sometimes been notably lower compared to expectations.

Temitope Musowo, a public policy expert, stated that if not for the desperation of politicians who are not interested in free and fair elections in Nigeria, voting should be a normal democratic activity, not something that requires the deployment of battalions of armed security officials to make polling units intimidating.

“We don’t need all this heavy security. Look at how it is done abroad. Our people are not ready to conduct free and fair elections because they know they have failed the people who may reject them,” Musowo said.