In February 2019, as Nigeria braced for national elections, then-Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai issued a chilling warning on live television. Appearing on NTA’s Tuesday Live, he told foreign election observers they would “go back in body bags” if they interfered in Nigeria’s affairs. Condemned as a death threat, the statement sparked outrage at home and abroad. The opposition PDP demanded a travel ban on El-Rufai, but the federal government, led by President Buhari, dismissed the criticism, framing the governor’s words as patriotic. The message was clear: threats from the ruling elite face no consequences.
That moment normalized hate speech and intimidation in Nigerian politics. Verbal attacks, once rare, have become a staple tactic for silencing dissent and rallying supporters. By 2025, this trend has intensified, with fresh examples in Edo State and beyond threatening Nigeria’s democratic fabric.
El-Rufai’s 2019 Threat and Its Legacy
El-Rufai’s televised remark targeted foreign observers monitoring Nigeria’s presidential election, invoking sovereignty to justify his warning. Though some called it metaphorical, the intent was unmistakable: intimidate anyone questioning the ruling APC. The PDP labeled it incitement and urged sanctions, while the U.S. and EU expressed concern. Yet, Nigeria’s presidency defended El-Rufai.
No consequences followed no sanctions, no censure. El-Rufai remained a powerful APC figure, his words setting a dangerous precedent: hate speech by influential politicians would go unpunished, even celebrated as nationalism.
2025: Okpebholo’s Threat to Peter Obi
In June 2025, Edo State Governor Monday Okpebholo echoed El-Rufai’s playbook. At a public rally, he warned opposition leader Peter Obi not to enter Edo without his permission, stating, “His security will not be guaranteed. If anything happens to him, he will have himself to blame.” Widely seen as a veiled threat, the remark drew sharp criticism.
Okpebholo later called it “advice,” but legal experts rejected this. Nigeria’s Constitution, under Section 41(1), guarantees freedom of movement for all citizens. No governor can lawfully restrict it. Former NBA spokesman Kunle Edun emphasized that only valid laws not political threats can limit such rights. Yet, the federal government stayed silent, and Okpebholo’s party backed his stance.
Jarret Tenebe’s Incendiary Rhetoric
Edo APC Chairman Jarret Tenebe amplified the hostility. At a July 2025 press briefing, he declared, “I do not like Peter Obi… I hate the person. The constitution does not say don’t hate someone.” His open hostility toward a national opposition figure crossed into incitement, analysts warned, fueling division and risking violence. Once again, security agencies and the presidency took no action.
The Legal Framework
Nigeria’s Constitution protects free speech and movement under Sections 39(1) and 41(1), respectively. Restrictions are permitted only through laws “reasonably justifiable” for public safety. The Cybercrimes Act of 2015 criminalizes digital hate speech, and a proposed 2019 Hate Speech Bill sought life imprisonment for incitement. Though the bill stalled, the legal framework exists.
Enforcement, however, is inconsistent. Ruling party loyalists often evade scrutiny, while critics face arrests or investigations. This double standard shields hate speech from those in power.
A Threat to Democracy
Hate speech erodes democracy by silencing dissent, inciting violence, and spreading fear. In states like Kaduna and Edo, inflammatory rhetoric has preceded actual violence. Amplified by social media, these words spread rapidly, deepening polarization in Nigeria’s multiethnic society and risking ethnic or religious conflict.
When leaders vilify opponents as enemies, they delegitimize dissent and undermine trust in institutions. Nigeria’s democratic decline stems not only from electoral fraud but from rhetoric that poisons civic discourse.
Government Inaction and Double Standards
The federal government’s response is selective. El-Rufai was defended, Okpebholo ignored, and Tenebe faced no probe. Meanwhile, opposition voices are often harassed. This impunity emboldens ruling party figures to wield hate speech without fear.
In 2019, the U.S. and U.K. warned of visa bans for those inciting violence. That threat must now extend to current offenders to deter further escalation.
A Call for International Action
The U.S., EU, UN, and ECOWAS must act decisively. Politicians like El-Rufai, Okpebholo, and Tenebe should face visa bans and asset freezes for their reckless rhetoric. International election monitors should track hate speech as a democratic threat, responding with swift, nonviolent measures like travel restrictions.
These actions aim not to punish Nigeria but to safeguard its democracy, supporting citizens who deserve a safe, inclusive political space.
A Democracy in Peril
Nigeria’s democracy is under siege not just by ballots or bullets, but by words. When leaders threaten, insult, or express hatred, they dismantle civic trust. Laws exist to curb this, but impunity prevails.
If Nigeria’s institutions fail to act, the international community must step in with sanctions and condemnation to uphold democratic norms. Above all, Nigerian voters must demand accountability. Democracy thrives on dialogue, not intimidation. Nigeria cannot afford to normalize hate it must confront it, or risk losing the freedoms its Constitution enshrines.