By Aminu Adamu
Throughout Nigeria’s democratic experience, few issues have become as glaringly disquieting as the degeneration of political dialogue into uncouth exchanges, character assassination, and brazenly uncivil rhetoric. The political space, particularly during electioneering periods, has morphed into a theater of insult-laden vitriol, where ideological debates are eclipsed by personal denigrations and tribalist undertones. This trend, if left unchecked, portends grave implications for the health of Nigeria’s democratic culture and the very soul of her national cohesion.
Nigeria is historically a society steeped in norms of respect, oratory finesse, and elder reverence—values enshrined in every cultural enclave, from the Hausa girmamawa, to the Yoruba omoluabi, to the Igbo nso ani. These cultural bedrocks dictate that public discourse, especially on matters of public interest, be conducted with measured restraint and intellectual rigor. Yet, the modern political elite have often weaponized public platforms to unleash torrents of abuse, incite divisions, and polarize communities.
What is particularly disturbing is the normalization of such verbal hostilities as political strategy. Campaign rallies, once meant to articulate development agendas, are now arenas where political gladiators hurl invectives, often broadcasted and amplified through traditional and social media. The youth, in turn, emulate these behaviours, reproducing vulgar political fanatism across digital spaces. Thus, a vicious cycle of incivility takes root, gradually eroding the dignity of political contestation.
Empirical Evidence of Declining Political Civility
According to a 2023 report by the Centre for Democracy and Development (#CDD), over 41% of political campaign content leading to the general elections contained hate speech, misinformation, or inflammatory remarks. Furthermore, the National Broadcasting Commission (#NBC) issued more than 20 sanctions between 2019 and 2023 to media houses that failed to censor politically offensive language aired on their platforms.
Moreover, the Independent National Electoral Commission (#INEC) has repeatedly decried the violent nature of campaigns, linking incendiary political utterances to election-related violence. Indeed, the National Human Rights Commission (#NHRC) in its 2023 pre-election report noted a correlation between the spike in hate speech and violent outbursts in no fewer than 12 states.
Contrastingly, many mature democracies, despite their imperfections, have institutionalised mechanisms for civil political engagement. In the United Kingdom, for instance, the Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament requires public officials to uphold standards of integrity, objectivity, and respect in their interactions. Even in the hyper-partisan arena of American politics, presidential debates, though robust and confrontational, are moderated by strict guidelines to prevent descent into vulgarity.
In Scandinavian countries like Sweden and Norway, political culture places a premium on issue-based campaigns, with strict laws against hate speech and defamation. Offenders, regardless of political status, are held legally accountable. The contrast here lies not in the absence of political rivalry, but in the maturity of discourse and the enforcement of decorum.
The persistence of uncivil political language in Nigeria is underpinned by several factors:
- Weak Institutional Sanctions: Regulatory bodies often shy away from enforcing consequences, especially when offenders belong to ruling parties.
- Ethno-religious Manipulation: Politicians frequently exploit ethnic and religious sentiments, framing opponents as threats to communal identities.
- Illiteracy and Political Apathy: A large swathe of the electorate is unaware of their rights and susceptible to populist propaganda, making insult-based politicking a low-effort path to support.
- Absence of Ideological Politics: Nigeria lacks strong party ideologies, resulting in political campaigns centered around personalities rather than policies.
Reversing this trajectory requires a multi-pronged approach. First, political parties must be compelled—by law and moral suasion—to adopt ‘Civility Charters’ that bind aspirants to codes of decent engagement. Secondly, media regulators must intensify monitoring and sanction mechanisms against platforms that propagate political insults. Furthermore, political education should be reintroduced in civic curricula, emphasizing respect, tolerance, and pluralism.
Lastly, the Nigerian public must be reoriented to demand more from their leaders. The focus should shift from who can shout louder, insult better, or divide deeper—to who can articulate clearer visions, propose workable solutions, and foster unity in diversity.
The soul of democracy lies not merely in the act of voting but in the quality of discourse that precedes it. When politics descends into a cesspool of insults, the electorate is denied the opportunity to make informed choices. Nigeria must rise above the politics of insult and embrace the politics of ideas. Anything less is a betrayal of her democratic promise and her cultural heritage.
