Tinubu’s Dangerous Overreach: A Stark Warning Against Intimidating the Legislature, Judiciary, and the Nigerian People

By Zakari Mohammed

The resolutions emerging from the Ibadan summit are not routine political statements; they are a direct warning signal about the trajectory of governance under the APC and the administration of Bola Ahmed Tinubu. What is increasingly evident is a pattern of shrinking democratic space, the weaponization of institutions, and a subtle but dangerous drift toward political uniformity.

No ruling party, regardless of its electoral strength, possesses the constitutional or moral authority to convert victory at the polls into a de facto one-party state. Democracy thrives on competition, dissent, and institutional neutrality; once these are undermined, the entire system begins to weaken.

In this context, the Ibadan Declaration stands out as a necessary and timely intervention a right step in the right direction and a force that must be recognized for what it truly represents: the opposition taking its destiny firmly into its own hands. It reflects a conscious decision to move beyond fragmentation toward coordinated political action, signaling that the era of disjointed resistance is giving way to structured engagement.

For the APC and its supporters, this is not something to dismiss or trivialize; it is something that must command serious attention and, indeed, concern not because it threatens instability, but because it demonstrates that alternative political forces are organizing with clarity of purpose and a shared resolve to challenge the status quo.

There is a growing concern about incursions into the independence of both the legislature and the judiciary institutions that are meant to serve as guardrails against executive excess. Any attempt, direct or indirect, to pressure or influence these arms of government strikes at the very foundation of constitutional democracy.

When the legislature is cowed or the judiciary is perceived as compromised, the balance of power collapses, leaving citizens exposed to unchecked authority. Such a path is not strength; it is a dangerous overreach that history has repeatedly shown to end badly for nations that travel it.

There is a recurring temptation in governance to believe that tightening control guarantees stability. In reality, the use of an iron fist whether through harassment of opposition figures, manipulation of electoral processes, or intimidation of dissenting voices creates only an illusion of order.

Beneath that surface, discontent accumulates. Suppression does not eliminate opposition; it hardens it, broadens its appeal, and deepens public sympathy.

When citizens begin to perceive elections as predetermined or institutions as compromised, the legitimacy of governance itself is called into question. At that point, democracy is no longer strengthened by elections; it is endangered by them.

The Nigerian people themselves must not be treated as subjects to be managed, but as citizens to be respected. Any attempt to silence, intimidate, or sideline the populace whether through policy, rhetoric, or force risks igniting a backlash that no government can fully control.

A nation as politically conscious and diverse as Nigeria cannot be subdued indefinitely. When people begin to feel excluded, ignored, and suppressed, the reaction is not passive acceptance but mounting resistance.

It must be clearly understood that state power is not personal or partisan property. Nigeria’s institutions exist to serve the republic, not the interests of any single party.

When those institutions are bent to partisan purposes, the damage extends far beyond one administration it weakens public trust in governance itself. The long-term cost of such erosion is far greater than any short-term political advantage that might be gained through coercion or control.

The path before the ruling party is therefore stark and consequential. It can choose to act as a custodian of democratic principles allowing credible competition and preserving institutional integrity or it can continue down a path that prioritizes dominance over legitimacy.

The latter carries profound risks. Democracy does not collapse suddenly; it is gradually suffocated through a series of decisions that chip away at its foundations. If that process continues unchecked, Nigeria risks reaching a tipping point where institutions lose credibility, elections lose meaning, and governance loses the consent of the governed.

History is unforgiving in its judgment of those who preside over the erosion of democratic systems. The choices made in this moment will not only shape immediate political outcomes but will define how this era is remembered.

A nation of over 200 million people cannot be governed sustainably through pressure, intimidation, or exclusion. The preservation of democracy requires restraint, fairness, and a commitment to principles that transcend party interests.

Anything less risks consequences that extend beyond politics into the very stability and future of the nation.

Zakari Mohammed is the Spokesman, 7th Assembly of the Oyo state House of Assembly and he wrote in from Ibadan, Oyo State.