In Lagos, thugs disrupted an opposition gathering, attacking participants and damaging vehicles. Although the circumstances surrounding the two incidents differ, both demand sober national attention
By Babafemi Ojudu
Nigeria is bleeding. At a time of economic hardship, insecurity and growing public frustration, our politics is becoming dangerously combustible. Political meetings are attacked, campaign vehicles burnt, billboards destroyed and citizens threatened over their political choices. Every incident breeds another grievance, another accusation and another threat of retaliation. We must act before these scattered fires develop into a national conflagration.
The disturbing scenes reported in Abuja on Friday, November 13, and the attack on an NDC gathering in Lagos the previous day make this warning particularly urgent.
In Abuja, young men were heard chanting “Ba ma yi! Ba ma yi!”—an expression of rejection—as President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s convoy departed after Friday prayers. Reports that stones were thrown at the convoy have been disputed by presidential aides, despite several video clips circulating on social media. The conflicting accounts require a transparent investigation.
In Lagos, thugs disrupted an opposition gathering, attacking participants and damaging vehicles. Although the circumstances surrounding the two incidents differ, both demand sober national attention.
Let us be clear: citizens have the right to reject a president politically, express their grievances and campaign against his re-election. Peaceful dissent is a democratic right. Throwing stones at anyone, including the President, is violence. Equally, citizens attending an opposition meeting are exercising a constitutional freedom. Attacking them is an assault on that freedom. Neither public anger nor party loyalty confers a licence to injure others.
The President must be safe among the people he governs. The people must also be safe when they disagree with him.
That is the democratic standard we must collectively defend.
I am deeply troubled by the growing hostility in our public life. No responsible government should dismiss expressions of public discontent without examining their underlying causes. Similarly, no responsible opposition should celebrate violence simply because the person targeted occupies the presidency. When public anger becomes an occasion for partisan celebration rather than sober reflection, we move closer to a danger that could eventually overwhelm us all.
Nigeria’s history offers a grave warning. The federal election crisis of 1964 and the violence surrounding the Western Region election of 1965 helped undermine the First Republic. Political rivalry degenerated into intimidation, reprisals and bloodshed. Institutions lost credibility as public confidence in peaceful remedies weakened. The consequences extended far beyond the politicians and communities where the disputes originated.
The circumstances today are different. But we must recognise the danger when political competition begins to make ordinary life unsafe. We do not have to repeat every detail of an earlier catastrophe before learning its lessons.
My concern is the safety of Nigerians and the survival of our democracy. APC members must be free to campaign and organise in every part of the country, and the same protection must extend to members of every other political party. No electoral victory can compensate for the destruction of the country we seek to govern.
When reports of violence emerged from Kaduna, Kebbi, Nasarawa and Katsina, I raised the alarm. I condemned attacks against the ruling party, the destruction of APC billboards and the burning of campaign vehicles. I also condemned attacks against opposition supporters, including the reported assault on an ADC media convoy in Kebbi.
My position then was clear: “These incidents deserve investigation wherever they occur and whoever is affected.”
That remains my position today. The attack on the NDC gathering in Lagos deserves unequivocal condemnation. Any attack on the President’s convoy deserves the same. This standard must apply in the North, South, East and West. A principle that changes according to the identity of the victim is merely a preference dressed in respectable language.
We must resist the temptation to explain away an attack as retaliation for violence elsewhere. Every incident must be investigated on its own evidence. An innocent person in Lagos does not become answerable for an offence committed in Katsina. A party member in the East does not inherit responsibility for the actions of a thug in the North.
Once we accept that dangerous logic, every Nigerian becomes a potential hostage to someone else’s grievance.
We must also reject the reckless habit of assigning ethnic ownership to political parties. Labelling a party as “Igbo,” “Yoruba” or “Hausa” can transform political disagreement into collective ethnic blame. From there, it is a short and terrible journey to attacks on people whose only connection to a dispute is a shared name, language or place of birth.
Nigeria has travelled that road before. We should have learned enough from its graves.
To those who question my motives because I am Yoruba, my answer is simple: my ethnicity does not suspend my conscience. I do not need permission from any ethnic camp to defend the rights of Nigerians. Neither does my membership of the APC relieve me of the responsibility to condemn wrongdoing, including wrongdoing committed in its name.
Violence is the visible symptom. The deeper danger is the growing belief that political opponents are enemies to be crushed, public institutions are weapons to be captured and electoral victory confers ownership of the state.
That belief must be confronted.
President Tinubu bears a particular responsibility to lead this effort. As President, his responsibility to protect extends to supporters and opponents alike. He should urgently convene political party leaders and presidential contestants, with INEC, security chiefs and credible peace mediators in attendance.
Such a meeting must produce more than photographs and handshakes. It must establish practical arrangements for protecting political gatherings, channels for resolving grievances and clear commitments against intimidation. Nigerians must see these commitments implemented and enforced.
Security agencies must investigate attacks promptly and impartially, make their findings public and bring perpetrators and their sponsors before the courts. Party affiliation must offer no immunity, just as opposition status must attract no presumption of guilt. Peaceful protesters must not be treated as violent offenders, while those who commit violence must not escape accountability by claiming to be protesters.
Political leaders must moderate their language and take responsibility for the conduct they encourage, finance or excuse. Words spoken from a podium can become instructions in the ears of an excitable crowd. A leader cannot inflame supporters, wink at intimidation and then claim innocence when violence follows.
Government must also listen. Public frustration cannot be wished away by dismissing every grievance as opposition propaganda. Where government policies impose hardship, those bearing the burden deserve a hearing and a credible response. Security measures may contain an incident, but restoring public trust requires fairness, accountability and visible concern for people’s welfare.
Opposition leaders have an equally clear obligation: they must channel public discontent through peaceful and constitutional means. They must restrain their supporters and condemn violence without calculating whether doing so will benefit or damage the government.
This responsibility extends beyond politicians. Former heads of state, religious leaders, traditional rulers, labour unions, professional associations, civil society organisations, the media and concerned citizens must speak and act now. They should demand accountability, challenge inflammatory falsehoods and insist that every community remains open to peaceful political participation.
Silence from respected voices leaves the public space to those who profit from division.
I have suffered under military rule. I know the cost of losing the freedom to speak, organise and dissent. Some of us confronted dictatorship and paid with our liberty, health and years of our lives. We have no desire to watch another generation inherit that struggle because political actors cannot discipline their ambitions.
Those who imagine that disorder will consume only their opponents understand neither history nor the nature of fire.
I warned earlier: “It is not too late for us to quench this fire now.”
That opportunity remains, but we must seize it. Every attack left unpunished weakens confidence in the law. Every threat rewarded with applause makes the next threat easier. Every grievance ignored gives bitterness more room to grow.
Elections must offer Nigerians a choice, not confront them with a threat. No candidate is indispensable. No party is entitled to perpetual power. No grievance grants anyone a licence to maim or kill.
Our responsibility is to preserve a country where we can lose an election and still belong, win an election and remain accountable to the law.
I call on every well-meaning Nigerian to act before condemnation gives way to mourning.
No political ambition is worth Nigeria’s destruction.