A political affairs analyst and chieftain of the All Progressives Congress, APC, Dr George Agbakahi, has cautioned against proposals for political parties and private groups to establish parallel election result declaration systems.

He warned that such initiatives could undermine Nigeria’s constitutional order, fuel political instability, and threaten national security.

In a comprehensive rebuttal to recent suggestions attributed to political economist and public affairs commentator, Prof Pat Utomi, Agbakahi argued that only the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, possessed the constitutional authority to authenticate and declare election results in Nigeria.

Agbakahi, who serves as the South-East Leader of the Tinubu Support Organization, made the argument in a statement titled “Competing Electoral Verdicts and the Threat to Democratic Stability in Nigeria: The Perils of Parallel Result Declarations in Nigeria.”

According to Agbakahi, the legitimacy and stability of any democratic system depend on the existence of a single lawful authority empowered to determine electoral outcomes.

He maintained that the Nigerian Constitution and the Electoral Act clearly vest that responsibility exclusively in INEC, stressing that electoral results derive legal force only when they have been authenticated and declared through constitutionally prescribed procedures.

“The stability and legitimacy of every constitutional democracy depend fundamentally upon the existence of a single lawful authority empowered to determine and authenticate electoral outcomes,” he stated.

He argued that the electoral framework established under the Constitution and Electoral Act provides a structured chain of result collation and declaration, beginning from polling units through various levels of collation up to the national level, all under INEC’s supervision.

According to him, the legal framework neither contemplates nor authorizes any parallel institution to perform equivalent functions.

Political parties have access to results, not authority to declare winners

Agbakahi acknowledged that political parties play a significant role in monitoring elections and already possess broad access to electoral data through accredited agents stationed at polling units and collation centres.

He noted that party agents are entitled to observe vote counting, verify entries on official result sheets, receive copies of polling unit results, and monitor the collation process at various levels.

Furthermore, he pointed to technological innovations such as the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) and the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV), which provide political parties, observers, civil society organisations, and the public with enhanced access to election information.

However, he insisted that access to electoral data does not translate into legal authority to declare election outcomes.

While parties may collect, analyse, and preserve election results for verification purposes and challenge discrepancies through election petitions, he argued that the authority to officially announce winners remains solely with INEC.

“The possession of electoral data does not confer the legal authority to pronounce upon the outcome of an election,” he wrote.

Judicial review, not parallel declarations

The APC stalwart further argued that where political parties believe official results do not reflect lawful votes cast, the Constitution already provides a clear avenue for redress through election petition tribunals and appellate courts.

He stressed that democratic governance requires aggrieved actors to seek remedies through judicial processes rather than resorting to what he described as “self-help” mechanisms.

According to him, attempts by political parties to establish alternative result declaration platforms would amount to an unconstitutional usurpation of powers reserved for electoral authorities.

Agbakahi also dismissed arguments that such declarations could be justified under constitutional guarantees of freedom of expression, noting that fundamental rights are subject to lawful restrictions in the interest of public safety, public order, and democratic stability.

Parallel result-transmission systems dangerous 

Agbakahi expressed particular concern over proposals advocating real-time independent result aggregation systems operated by political parties and accessible to both domestic and international audiences.

Although such proposals are often presented as tools for enhancing transparency and accountability, he argued that they could create competing centres of electoral legitimacy.

He warned that if multiple parties begin publishing independent electoral verdicts, Nigeria’s electoral landscape could become fragmented into conflicting narratives, especially in an era increasingly influenced by artificial intelligence, machine learning, and deepfake technologies.

“If every registered political party were to establish and publicise independent result-declaration systems, Nigeria’s electoral space would inevitably become fragmented into multiple and potentially conflicting narratives of electoral truth,” he stated.

According to him, democracy requires certainty regarding who has won an election and which institution possesses the authority to make that determination.

Agbakahi further linked competing electoral verdicts to broader concerns about national security and political stability.

He described INEC’s exclusive authority as a component of what he termed “electoral sovereignty”.

Drawing parallels with the judiciary, he argued that just as individuals cannot establish private courts to issue binding judgments, political parties cannot establish alternative institutions to declare election results.

He warned that situations where multiple actors claim authority to determine election outcomes often trigger legitimacy crises that can lead to unrest, institutional breakdown, and economic instability.

To support his argument, Agbakahi cited several historical examples from Nigeria’s political experience.

He referenced the Western Region crisis of 1964–1965, which contributed to the collapse of the First Republic and eventually led to military intervention in 1966.

He also pointed to the fallout from the annulment of the June 12, 1993 presidential election, which generated a prolonged legitimacy crisis and political instability.

The APC chieftain further recalled the violence that followed the 2011 presidential election, noting that more than 800 people were reportedly killed and tens of thousands displaced in post-election disturbances.

According to him, these incidents demonstrate that disputes over electoral legitimacy often carry significant consequences for national unity, economic growth, and public security.

African examples highlight dangers

Beyond Nigeria, Agbakahi cited experiences from other African countries where disputed election results and competing claims to victory triggered violent crises.

He highlighted the 2007–2008 post-election violence in Kenya, which resulted in over 1,100 deaths and widespread displacement.

He also referenced the 2010–2011 electoral crisis in Côte d’Ivoire and the disputed 2008 elections in Zimbabwe, arguing that fragmented electoral legitimacy frequently leads to violence, institutional disruption, and economic decline.

Given Nigeria’s size, ethnic diversity, and history of election-related tensions, he warned that similar developments could have particularly severe consequences.

Concerns ahead of 2027 elections

Looking ahead to the 2027 general elections, Agbakahi identified growing political polarisation, declining trust in public institutions, economic hardship, and the rapid spread of digital information as factors that could amplify the dangers associated with competing result-declaration systems.

He warned that partisan result platforms could encourage premature mobilisation of supporters, deepen mistrust in official institutions, and create narratives that become difficult to resolve through constitutional channels.

Such uncertainty, he said, could negatively affect investor confidence, economic planning, and perceptions of Nigeria’s political stability.

Agbakahi concluded by urging strict enforcement of existing electoral laws against unauthorised attempts to announce or simulate official election results.

He also called on INEC to continue strengthening transparency measures, including the expansion of real-time publication of polling-unit results through digital platforms.

In addition, he advocated possible legislative clarification to address emerging technological challenges while balancing freedom of expression with public order and electoral integrity.

He urged both domestic and international media organisations to clearly distinguish between official election declarations and partisan tallies to avoid amplifying narratives that could inflame tensions.

According to him, Nigeria’s democratic future depends not only on conducting credible elections but also on preserving the integrity of the institutions constitutionally empowered to validate electoral outcomes.

“The choice confronting the nation is not between transparency and opacity; it is between constitutional order and institutional fragmentation. In a constitutional democracy, electoral sovereignty must remain singular, lawful, and institutional,” Agbakahi stated.