Dangerous Political Rhetoric Is a Threat Nigeria Cannot Ignore
By Blessing Omolola Oladapo
I read with keen interest the editorial published by Daily Trust on September 1, titled “Shekwolo, Buba, Fadahunsi’s dangerous rhetoric threatens democracy.” I strongly agree with the newspaper’s position that the recent statements attributed to these public officials should not be dismissed as mere political talk. The issue is bigger than three politicians making careless remarks; it is about what happens when threats begin to find a comfortable place in our political conversations.
Politics is supposed to be a contest of ideas, policies and competence. It should be about convincing citizens, not frightening them. Statements suggesting that people should leave an area if they do not support a particular party, or threatening to break or cut off the fingers of critics, are far removed from the politics expected in a democracy. Words matter, especially when they come from people in positions of authority. A politician speaking at a rally is not simply addressing those physically present. Supporters listen. Opponents listen. Ordinary citizens listen. When threatening language comes from public officials, it can easily be interpreted as permission for supporters to intimidate those who think differently.
This is why the explanations that usually follow public outrage should not erase the original statements. If politicians understand the power of their words, they must also understand the responsibility that comes with that power. Nigeria has experienced the consequences of political tension before. We have seen how seemingly harmless statements can contribute to an atmosphere of fear and hostility. We should not wait until words become actions before acknowledging their danger.
Political parties also carry responsibility. Silence from party leaders when their members make inflammatory statements creates the impression that such behaviour is acceptable. A party that truly believes in democracy must be willing to call its members to order, regardless of how politically useful they may be. Security agencies must likewise do more than react after violence has occurred. Investigation and accountability should not begin only when damage has been done. If a statement reasonably raises concerns about public safety or political violence, it deserves serious attention.
As the 2027 elections draw closer, political competition will naturally intensify. Parties will criticise one another, candidates will challenge each other, and supporters will disagree. All of that is part of democracy. But disagreement must never become intimidation. A Nigerian should be able to support the APC, another party, or no party at all without being threatened, harassed or made to feel unwelcome in their own community. That is not a favour politicians grant citizens; it is a fundamental part of democratic participation.
We must therefore be careful about the political culture we are creating. When threats are repeatedly excused as jokes, campaign language or statements taken out of context, we risk normalising them. And when threats become normal, violence is not far behind. The 2027 elections should be a contest for the people’s votes, not a battle for their submission. Politicians must learn to persuade without threatening, criticise without intimidating and compete without creating fear. Threats are not politics, and intimidation is certainly not democracy.
Blessing Omolola Oladapo is a Strategic Communication student at Yakubu Gowon University.
Email: [email protected]
