Politics:
Jonathan Faults Governors, Political Leaders’ Presence At Off-Cycle Elections
According to him, such action undermines the country's democracy.
A file photo of former Nigeria’s President Goodluck Jonathan
Ex-President Goodluck Jonathan has faulted what he described as the “unwholesome” practice of serving governors, political officeholders, party leaders, and other influential figures converging on states where off-cycle elections are being conducted with large entourages of aides and security personnel.
Jonathan, who led Nigeria between 2010 and 2015, said the practice was an “emerging trend in political conduct during off-cycle elections that raises concerns”.
“The growing practice whereby serving governors, senior political office holders, party leaders and other influential government functionaries, accompanied by large numbers of aides and heavy security details from outside a state, converge on states where elections are being conducted raises an issue that demands national attention,” the former president said in a post on his X handle on Tuesday, days after the conduct of the Osun governorship election.
“The conduct witnessed around the recent elections in Osun, Ekiti and Ondo States was, in my view, unusual. It is not a practice that should become normal in a democratic society.”
Jonathan recalled a similar trend during the 2013 Anambra and 2014 Ekiti governorship elections when he was president.
OSUN AND THE NEED TO SET NEW BOUNDARIES FOR POLITICAL CONDUCT IN OFF-CYCLE ELECTIONS
The outcome of the recent governorship election in Osun State demonstrates that, despite the challenges confronting our democracy, we possess the capacity to conduct elections in a manner that…
— Goodluck E. Jonathan (@GEJonathan) August 18, 2026
“On those occasions, senior political leaders mobilised and descended upon the states. Upon being briefed, I ordered party leaders and senior government officials to leave the states immediately,” the ex-president wrote in the post.
He, however, said, “This trend is unwholesome. If left unchecked, it could threaten our fragile democracy and have serious long-term implications for democratic stability.”
Jonathan said that while political parties are entitled to campaign, mobilise their supporters and deploy their legitimate party structures, there is a point at which political mobilisation, particularly when it involves the overwhelming presence of serving governors, senior public officials and powerful political actors from across the country on election day, can create an atmosphere of apprehension, intimidation, bullying and undue pressure.
“We must ask ourselves whether the increasing deployment of political power and large-scale mobilisation by senior office holders on election day in states holding elections is consistent with the spirit of free, fair and peaceful democratic competition,” he said.
“We must not allow political competition to become a contest in which victory is perceived as something that must be achieved at all costs. There is also the question of precedent. If the current trend becomes established, what happens when governors from opposing political parties begin to descend on every state holding a competitive election?
“What happens when each party seeks to match political power with political power, governmental influence with governmental influence, and mobilisation with counter-mobilisation? Such a development would not strengthen our democracy. It would deepen political tensions and could make elections increasingly resemble battles for political survival rather than peaceful contests for the mandate of the people,” Jonathan posted.
