Peace Accord and the 2027 elections: Can Nigeria break the cycle of electoral violence?

By Eja Manifest Eji

The signatures have been appended. The cameras have captured the moment. The speeches have been delivered. Political parties and candidates have once again pledged to pursue their ambitions without violence, intimidation, hate speech or conduct capable of threatening Nigeria’s democratic process.

But beyond the handshakes, solemn declarations and carefully chosen words lies a question that millions of Nigerians are quietly asking:

Will this Peace Accord actually make the 2027 general elections safer, or will it become another political ritual that is remembered only until the campaigns become fierce?

That question is not without reason.

As Nigeria formally enters the campaign season for the 2027 general elections, presidential candidates and political parties have signed the National Peace Accord, committing themselves to issue-based campaigns and promising to reject violence, hate speech, misinformation and personal attacks. The Independent National Electoral Commission has also urged political actors to honour the commitments they have made.

On paper, it is an encouraging beginning.

In practice, however, Nigerians have seen this movie before.

The Osun warning

The recently concluded Osun State governorship election offers perhaps the clearest reason for Nigerians to approach the 2027 Peace Accord with both hope and caution.

Ahead of the August 15 election, political parties and candidates had signed an Osun Peace Accord organised by the National Peace Committee. The ceremony brought together candidates, political party leaders, security agencies, traditional rulers, civil society organisations and other stakeholders. INEC Chairman, Professor Joash Amupitan, specifically warned that the accord should not be treated as a mere formality.

Yet the atmosphere surrounding the election remained deeply troubling.

A pre-election security assessment by the Kimpact Development Initiative reported 73 election-related violent incidents resulting in 29 deaths in the build-up to the Osun election. Other reports also documented allegations and counter-allegations of attacks between political camps.

This presents Nigeria with an uncomfortable contradiction.

If political actors can sit together, sign an agreement and publicly promise peace, yet violence can still occur afterwards, what exactly is the value of the signature?

The answer may be that the problem has never been the absence of agreements.

The problem is the absence of sufficient consequences when agreements are broken.

A signature cannot stop a thug

A Peace Accord is important. It creates a moral commitment, establishes a public standard of behaviour and gives political parties something against which their conduct can be measured.

But a piece of paper cannot physically stop a political thug from attacking an opponent.

It cannot prevent a campaign convoy from being ambushed.

It cannot stop the destruction of campaign materials.

It cannot independently arrest someone who has been mobilised to cause violence.

It cannot prosecute a politician who secretly finances violence.

And it cannot guarantee the neutrality of every person acting in the name of a political party.

That is where the real challenge begins.

Political violence in Nigeria is rarely caused by candidates alone. Behind many incidents are supporters, party agents, political merchants, youth groups, local power brokers and individuals who believe that violence is a legitimate tool for winning or protecting political interests.

Therefore, if the 2027 Peace Accord is to mean anything beyond ceremony, its implementation must reach beyond the presidential candidates who signed it.

The message must travel from Abuja to the states, from state party leadership to local government areas, from local government leaders to wards, and from ward leaders to the individual supporters who eventually occupy the streets and polling units.

The fear of the Nigerian voter

For the ordinary Nigerian, the concern is not simply who wins the presidency.

It is whether the voter will be able to walk to a polling unit without fear.

It is whether a woman will be able to vote without being threatened.

It is whether young people will be allowed to make their political choices without being recruited into political violence.

It is whether journalists, observers and election officials will be able to perform their duties without intimidation.

It is whether political opponents can disagree passionately without becoming enemies.

And perhaps most importantly, it is whether the losing side will accept defeat through lawful means rather than turning the streets into battlegrounds.

These fears are particularly important because elections are supposed to provide citizens with a peaceful mechanism for changing leadership.

When elections become associated with bloodshed, intimidation and destruction, democracy itself begins to lose its meaning.

What should Nigerians expect from 2027?

Nigerians should neither approach 2027 with unnecessary fear nor with blind optimism.

They should approach it with vigilance.

The signing of the Peace Accord should be welcomed, but it should not be regarded as proof that violence has been defeated.

The real test will come when campaigns become intense, when politicians begin attacking one another, when misinformation spreads rapidly online, when supporters become emotionally charged and when the stakes become too high for some political actors to accept defeat easily.

That is when the accord must speak.

And when it fails to speak through voluntary compliance, the law must speak through enforcement.

INEC has already stated that the success of the 2027 elections is a collective responsibility involving political parties, security agencies, the media, civil society organisations and citizens. The Commission has also emphasised the importance of security cooperation, voter education and stakeholder engagement.

That collective responsibility must now move from speeches to action.

The security agencies have a critical role

The Nigerian Police Force and other security agencies cannot afford to wait until violence erupts before responding.

Election security must be preventive rather than merely reactive.

Where intelligence indicates that particular individuals, groups or locations are vulnerable to violence, authorities should act early and within the law.

More importantly, Nigerians must see that political violence has consequences.

The perception that politically connected individuals can commit electoral offences and escape punishment is dangerous for democracy.

A Peace Accord without accountability can easily become a gentleman’s agreement without teeth.

Political parties must look beyond their candidates

Political parties also have a responsibility that cannot be transferred to INEC or the security agencies.

They must educate their supporters.

They must discipline members who engage in violence.

They must reject thuggery even when it appears politically convenient.

They must stop glorifying individuals whose influence is built around intimidation.

And they must understand that winning an election at the cost of destroying communities is not democratic victory.

Political ambition must have limits.

No office is worth a human life.

No election is worth burning a community.

No political disagreement should turn neighbours into enemies.

The media and social media must also be careful

The 2027 election will not be fought only on campaign grounds and polling units.

It will also be fought on Facebook, X, TikTok, WhatsApp, YouTube and other digital platforms.

False information can travel faster than security agencies can respond.

A fabricated result, an inflammatory video or a false report of an attack can trigger real-world violence within minutes.

This places a huge responsibility on journalists, bloggers, influencers and ordinary social media users.

The question should not always be, “Can I post this?”

It should also be:

“What could happen if thousands of people believe this?”

Responsible journalism and responsible citizenship will therefore be essential to the survival of the 2027 electoral process.

And what should Nigerians do?

Citizens must refuse to become instruments in the hands of politicians.

Young Nigerians, especially, must recognise that their lives are worth more than whatever money, food or temporary political appointment may be offered in exchange for violence.

Do not fight because someone paid you.

Do not attack someone because they support another candidate.

Do not destroy property because your preferred candidate lost.

Do not spread information simply because it favours your political camp.

And do not allow political loyalty to destroy the relationships that will remain long after the election is over.

Nigerians must also demand accountability.

If a politician violates the Peace Accord, citizens should not simply complain privately. Civil society organisations, the media, professional bodies, religious leaders and voters should document such violations and demand appropriate action.

Indeed, voters have perhaps the most powerful weapon of all: their votes.

A candidate who openly promotes violence should not be rewarded for it.

A political party that repeatedly violates democratic principles should face the judgement of the electorate.

Hope must survive, but hope must be realistic

Despite the fears surrounding the 2027 election, Nigerians should not surrender hope.

The Peace Accord matters.

Dialogue matters.

Political tolerance matters.

INEC’s preparedness matters.

The involvement of civil society matters.

The presence of traditional and religious leaders matters.

The vigilance of citizens matters.

But none of these, individually or collectively, can guarantee a peaceful election unless political actors genuinely choose peace and institutions are prepared to enforce the rules.

The Osun experience should therefore not make Nigerians conclude that Peace Accords are useless.

Rather, it should teach us that a Peace Accord is a starting point, not an endpoint.

The real accord must be signed not only on paper but in the conduct of political actors.

It must be visible in campaign speeches.

It must be visible in political rallies.

It must be visible on social media.

It must be visible in the behaviour of party supporters.

It must be visible at polling units.

And, perhaps most importantly, it must remain visible after the results are announced.

2027: The real test begins after the signatures

Nigeria has conducted elections before.

Nigeria has signed peace agreements before.

Nigeria has made promises before.

What Nigerians need now is something different: credible enforcement of those promises.

The 2027 election presents the country with another opportunity to demonstrate that political competition does not have to mean political warfare.

The candidates may compete.

The parties may disagree.

The campaigns may become intense.

But Nigeria must remain bigger than every candidate, every political party and every ambition.

The question, therefore, is no longer simply whether politicians will sign the Peace Accord.

They have signed it.

The bigger question is:

Will they live by it when the political battle becomes difficult?

That is the question Nigerians should keep asking from now until Election Day.

Because democracy is not truly strengthened when politicians promise peace in front of cameras.

Democracy is strengthened when they choose peace when nobody is watching.