By Okechukwu Nwanguma
Nigeria’s democracy rests not only on periodic elections, but on the constitutional guarantee that citizens can assemble peacefully and demand reforms without fear of repression.
The reported teargassing of peaceful protesters at the National Assembly demanding electronic transmission of election results raises serious concerns about the direction of civic freedoms under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
It is particularly striking because Tinubu himself was once a visible figure in Nigeria’s pro-democracy struggles—participating in civic resistance during the military era, when protests were often met with brutal force. He was also among the prominent political figures who supported the nationwide protests against President Goodluck Jonathan in 2012 over the removal of fuel subsidy.
That history makes today’s intolerance of peaceful civic expression even more troubling.
*The Protest and the Response*
The demonstrators gathered under the #OccupyNASS banner to demand mandatory real-time electronic transmission of election results to INEC’s IReV portal—a reform widely seen as critical to strengthening electoral transparency.
Among those present were Oby Ezekwesili, Omoyele Sowore, and Adewole Adebayo.
Their message was clear: electoral integrity is foundational to democratic legitimacy. Yet the response reportedly involved the deployment of anti-riot police and the firing of tear gas at a crowd described as peaceful. When peaceful advocacy for electoral reform is met with force, it sends a chilling signal about shrinking civic space.
*A Pattern of Democratic Regression?*
This incident does not stand alone. Across Nigeria, there have been increasing concerns about:
– Suppression of peaceful assemblies
– Criminalisation of dissent
– Excessive use of force against protesters
– Delayed or selective implementation of electoral reforms
Democracy cannot survive if citizens are treated as adversaries for demanding transparency.
*The Irony of History*
President Tinubu’s political career was shaped by resistance to authoritarianism during the military years. Many remember his role in exile politics and pro-democracy activism during the struggle against military rule.
It is therefore deeply ironic that under his presidency, citizens advocating electoral reform—a democratic demand—face dispersal with force at the gates of the legislature.
History often tests former activists when they assume power. The question is whether they will protect the freedoms they once relied upon—or curtail them.
*Why Electronic Transmission Matters*
The demand for electronic transmission of results is not radical; it is a reform designed to:
– Reduce manual manipulation
– Increase transparency
– Build public trust in elections
– Deter post-election violence
If democracy is to deepen, reforms that strengthen transparency should not be treated as threats.
*The Bigger Question*
The issue is larger than one protest. It is about whether Nigeria is normalising state intolerance for peaceful civic engagement.
A democracy confident in its legitimacy does not fear protesters carrying placards. It engages them.
If civic space continues to shrink, Nigeria risks sliding into a form of electoral authoritarianism—where elections occur, but accountability weakens and dissent is policed rather than heard.
*The Way Forward*
– Immediate clarification from the police on the justification for use of force
– Commitment from the National Assembly leadership to engage reform advocates
– Clear reaffirmation by the Presidency of citizens’ constitutional right to peaceful assembly
Nigeria’s democracy was hard fought. Those who once stood in protest lines should understand better than most that repression of peaceful dissent is the first warning sign of democratic backsliding.
History watches leaders most closely when they hold the power they once challenged.
Mr Okechukwu Nwanguma is a human rights activist in Nigeria and also the Executive Director of RULAAC. Securitynewsalert.com.
