"Some will, some may not. People take agreements more seriously when there are consequences for breaking them." The post 2027 Peace Accord not uhuru for credible electoral process – CSOs, lawyers appeared first on Vanguard News .
By Gabriel Ewepu
With five months to the 2027 general elections, the National Peace Committee, NPC, chaired by former Head of State, Abdulsalami Abubakar, in partnership with The Kukah Centre on August 18, 2026 brought together presidential candidates and national chairpersons of political parties participating in the elections at the International Conference Centre, Abuja. There, they signed a National Peace Accord with the aim of promoting and sustaining peace before, during and after the elections.
Read Also: Fuel hike: Labour, CSOs accuse FG, operators of gang-up, exploitation
The agreement was signed by President Bola Tinubu, the presidential candidate of the All Progressives Congress, APC, who was represented by the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, George Akume. The APC National Chairman, Nentawe Yilwatda, also signed the accord; the presidential candidate of the Nigeria Democratic Congress, NDC, Peter Obi; the African Action Congress, AAC, candidate, Omoyele Sowore; and the Social Democratic Party, SDP, candidate, Adewole Adebayo.
They also agreed to base their campaigns on real issues affecting Nigerians and not to instigate or sponsor violence, including other things that undermine the electoral process.
Speaking with Vanguard, Nigerians said the National Peace Accord is welcomed, but most times the same politicians fail to adhere to the terms of the agreement they have signed. They asserted that the signing of 2027 National Peace Accord is not the midas touch for a transparent and credible electoral process, but recommended how the process can be strengthened.
A human rights lawyer and Principal Partner, Idris Faro and CO, Idris Faro, said 2027 signing of the National Peace Accord by candidates of political parties would not be different from other ones signed.
Faro said, “Though a good idea, it is a fanciful yearly routine heralding the general elections.
“Politicians have often failed to adhere strictly to the terms of the accord as there is always violence by some of their supporters. They have a responsibility to rein in their supporters.
“Not until politicians are jailed for political violence, it will continue recurring.
“The prosecution of electoral offences and other violent conducts is far better than signing the Peace Accord.
“The Accord isn’t provided for in the Electoral Act and not backed by statute. However, the Electoral Act and other federal and state legislations prohibit unlawful conducts and acts of violence which are crimes under these laws.
“The snatching of ballot boxes, assaulting of voters and presiding officers, tampering with election materials, unlawful possession of firearms and other dangerous weapons are all offences under the law.
“You don’t need an accord to warn people against them. They are already provided for in the laws. The Accord only reminds them about these offences.
“The Accord hasn’t really made the electoral process entirely credible and acceptable to Nigerians because many still believe that their votes don’t count. Everyone, including the voters and party supporters have a role to play in the conduct of elections.
“They have a duty to conduct themselves peacefully at the polling unit.
“The Electoral Offences Commission is welcome. Punishment is what is needed to change our behaviour in this country. Law breakers deserve proportionate punishment for the offences committed.”
The National Chairman, Because Of Our Tomorrow, BOOT, Party, Sonny Adenuga, in his reaction said, “I did not attend because it is the same issues that have been since the Peace Accord was initiated. The Peace Accord should not be ceremonial but should go beyond political parties and their candidates but everybody in the electoral process.
“The Peace Accord is not meeting the aims and objectives, because the people talking about the peace accord do not understand it.
“Even the candidates don’t abide by their political parties as far as their names are with INEC as candidates to contest.
“The electorate needs to be sensitized on not being used by politicians and the Peace Accord should be a continuous exercise.”
In his response, a public affairs analyst, Dr Ebriku John Friday, said the National Peace Accord is now a working document and binding, therefore, politicians are to keep its term in the nest interest of Nigerians and the electoral process.
Friday said: “There’s no practical difference because it is part of the activities by INEC and all political parties participating in the fifth coming general election and it helps in a great way to douse tension in the country.
“Talking about whether politicians will keep to the terms of the peace accord, it’s a matter of a must because the signed document is now a working document. And over the years parties have tried not to go out of the accord despite some recorded disturbances during elections.
“It is hoped that the coming elections will be peaceful and Nigerians will elect their choices in a peaceful and safe environment.
“The peace accord document is very relevant to the peaceful process to the general elections, before, during and after the elections. You know all civilised nations like the US do the same.
“The exercise is necessary to get actors to commit to upholding the Constitution, the Electoral acts and others for a credible process.”
He also argued that, “Today there’s increased participation because political parties and actors believe in the process. So I think to a large extent it gives credibility to the process. And I believe we will continue to get better with the growing awareness and participation across the country today.
“I am sure Nigerians are carried along especially in this era of active social media usage. And with leaders and representatives from political parties being involved the information must have trickled down to Nigerians at the grassroots. And by doing so they are being carried along and get their buy in.”
Speaking on an alternative to the National Peace Accord by establishing the Electoral Offences Commission, he said, “For me signing the peace accord does not foreclose the idea of establishing the Electoral Offences Commission.
“They all help to strengthen the Electoral process, give credence to it and serve as a means of reducing electoral offences to the barest minimum, and possibly them eradicating completely in the long run.”
The Executive Director, International Press Centre, IPC, Lanre Arogundade, expressed optimism that the National Peace Accord could make a positive impact. He cited the action of former President Goodluck Jonathan on the outcome of the 2015 presidential election.
He said, “The Accord commits parties and candidates in the 2027 general elections to issue-focused campaigns devoid of hate speech, incitement, and disinformation. It can be used to hold politicians accountable for the promises, which requires civil society and media oversight.
“It is pursuant to the Electoral Act. It is difficult to say, but the conduct of President Goodluck Jonathan in ensuring a peaceful transition of power in 2015 has been cited as a product.”
However, the IPC boss called for the establishment of an Electoral Offences Commission, saying, “The Electoral Offences Commission would be better because it will be in a position to deal with all types of electoral misconduct. It will have its own internal mechanisms for investigating, arresting and prosecuting alleged perpetrators.”
Meanwhile, in his reaction, a public affairs commentator, Henry Bassey, stated that the signing of the National Peace Accord is relevant in Nigeria’s electoral process.
According to Bassey, “The Peace Accord is becoming more organised, but the real test is what happens when someone breaks it.
“Some will, some may not. People take agreements more seriously when there are consequences for breaking them.”
He also said the democratic process demands signing a Peace Accord as “it helps to promote peaceful elections. But the Peace Accord itself is more of a promise; the Electoral Law is what can punish offenders.
“It has helped to reduce tension and violence, but it has not by itself made our elections fully credible or acceptable to everyone.”
However, he said, no offender of the agreement has been punished, which he described as “one of its major weaknesses.”
Meanwhile, speaking on an alternative to the National Peace Accord, he said, “We need both. The Peace Accord says, ‘Please don’t break the rules’; an Electoral Offences Commission says, ‘If you break the law, you will face the consequences’.”
In another reaction, the National Coordinator, Niger Delta Youth Congress, NDYC, Comrade Israel Uwejeyan, stated that the 2027 National Peace is relevant for the smooth democratic transition.
“The 2027 Peace Accord is significant because it represents an evolution of an initiative that began in response to the very serious political tensions surrounding the 2015 general elections. The National Peace Committee itself says it was conceptualised in 2014 and has since served as a platform for dialogue, mediation and confidence-building among political actors.
“What is particularly noteworthy about the 2027 process is the attempt to move beyond simply asking politicians to avoid violence and to place greater emphasis on issue-based campaigns, responsible political communication, misinformation and disinformation, social-media conduct, protection of vulnerable groups, and respect for the Constitution and electoral laws.
“The 2027 Accord therefore comes at a time when electoral violence is no longer the only major threat to democratic stability. Hate speech, misinformation, disinformation, online incitement, intimidation and the deliberate erosion of public confidence in electoral institutions have become equally important.
“I therefore see this year as an opportunity to make the Peace Accord more than a ceremonial event. The real test will be whether there is continuous monitoring, public reporting and consequences for breaches throughout the electoral cycle.
“The fact that INEC itself has engaged the National Peace Committee ahead of 2027 and described rebuilding public trust as an important electoral priority, shows that the initiative has become part of the broader ecosystem supporting peaceful elections.
“However, I would not dismiss the Accord as meaningless. It creates a public record of commitment and gives civil society, the media, voters and the National Peace Committee a basis upon which to hold political actors accountable.
“The 2023 Accord, for example, expressly committed parties and candidates to being held accountable for breaches and recognised that consequences could arise under the Constitution and applicable laws.
“My position is simple: the Accord must move from a culture of signing to a culture of compliance.
“If a candidate signs the Accord on Monday and violates its principles on Tuesday, there should be an immediate public response, documentation of the breach and, where the conduct constitutes an offence under Nigerian law, investigation and prosecution by the appropriate authorities.
“As the National Coordinator of the Niger Delta Youth Congress, my position is that the Peace Accord should not become another ceremonial ritual where politicians sign documents, shake hands and return to politics as usual.
“The real value of the 2027 Accord will be determined by what happens after the cameras are gone.
“Nigeria does not merely need politicians to promise peace. We need political actors to respect the rules of democratic competition, institutions to enforce those rules impartially, and citizens to have confidence that no politician is above the law.”
A human rights lawyer and Principal Partner of Cornerstone Advocates, Toluwa Odheke, said the 2027 National Peace Accord signing is a commendable but a formality as politicians who signed it doubt the agreement.
Odheke pointed out that the “mechanics are familiar”. He further stated that the National Peace Committee has now “facilitated 30 Peace Accords since its inauguration on 25 January 2015”, and he said five at the national level ahead of the 2015, 2019 and 2023 general elections, and “25 at the sub-national level, including off-cycle governorship elections.”
He also stated that, “this is therefore the sixth national-level iteration of a nine-year-old initiative rather than a new invention. And the Committee itself traces its origin to a proposal by former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan and former Commonwealth Secretary-General Emeka Anyaoku at the original 14 January 2015 Abuja Accord ceremony.
“Two features distinguish the 2027 iteration from earlier cycles. First is the international co-signatory dimension: the European Union joined the Committee in signing this accord and pledged continued backing for an inclusive electoral process, a more visible diplomatic attachment than earlier cycles carried.
“Second is the explicit statutory framing adopted by the organisers, who described the accord as anchored in the Constitution, the Electoral Act, INEC guidelines, and other relevant laws governing the electoral process, an emphasis not pressed as strongly in earlier versions.
“Working against the initiative, however, is a visible participation gap: former Vice President Atiku Abubakar of the African Democratic Congress was absent from the ceremony and sent no representative, and Oyo State Governor Seyi Makinde of the Allied Peoples Movement was likewise absent, though his running mate attended in his place.
“A Peace Accord missing a leading challenger is, on its face, a weaker instrument than one signed by every serious contender.”
He expressed clear doubts about strict adherence and compliance to the Accord, which he said, “The signatories themselves have expressed open doubt. Peter Obi questioned the very need for a signed pledge, arguing that candidates seeking public office should demonstrate responsible conduct without being compelled to do so, while Omoyele Sowore dismissed the exercise as a “ritual” and called for concrete sanctions against violators, noting that previous signatories had gone on to participate in violent activities despite their commitments.
“This scepticism is grounded in recent experience. The Committee’s own post-election report on the 2023 general election disclosed that it came under intense pressure from unnamed persons seeking to have INEC halt or cancel the presidential election collation over an alleged violation of the Electoral Act and non-adherence to the peace accord the parties had themselves signed.
“Based on this trajectory, the realistic expectation is selective and partial compliance: genuine restraint from some actors, and continued brinkmanship from others once the contest tightens.”
On the legality the Accord lacks, he (Odheke) pointed out that, “The accord is a moral and political covenant witnessed by a civil-society and traditional-authority body, not a statute or an instrument made pursuant to one. The organisers’ claim that it is ‘anchored’ in the Constitution and the Electoral Act is a claim that its aspirations track obligations the law already imposes — for example, against incitement and hate speech — not that the accord itself creates new legal duties or a cause of action.
“If a candidate incites violence or engages in hate speech, that candidate may be prosecuted, but under the Electoral Act 2026 or the Cybercrimes Act, not under the peace accord as such. Breach of the accord, standing alone, attracts no fine, disqualification, or tribunal reference.
“Its force is reputational and political rather than judicial, and its relevance lies chiefly in the moral benchmark it sets for elite conduct, reinforced by INEC’s own framing of the contest as, in the words of its chairman, a “marketplace of ideas” rather than a “theatre of war”.
Meanwhile, he noted that, “The 2027 National Peace Accord continues a nine-year tradition that has produced genuine value in elite signaling and in occasional de-escalation, but no enforceable standard of conduct and no record of sanction for breach. Its credibility-building effect on Nigeria’s electoral process since 2015 has been real but secondary to legal and technological reforms.
“The pending Electoral Offences Commission, if finally established and properly resourced, would supply the enforcement dimension the accord structurally lacks; until then, the accord remains a valuable but voluntary instrument operating in the shadow of a still-incomplete legal architecture for electoral accountability.”
In another reaction, a public affairs analyst, Patrick Onoja, said, “I believe the major difference is that the Peace Accord has gradually evolved from being principally a high-level political commitment into a broader framework for preventive engagement, accountability and electoral risk management.
“For 2027, the important development is the Annotated Peace Accord, which agencies, political parties and civil society organisations in preparation for the Electoral Act. The National Peace Committee has also engaged INEC, security provides clearer guidance on prohibited conduct and draws on relevant provisions for elections.
“For Nigerians to have confidence in the 2027 elections, we must move beyond the symbolism of signing agreements.
“The Peace Accord must move from the conference hall to the political party structure, from national leaders to candidates and campaign agents, and ultimately to the ward level where much of the electoral contest actually takes place.
“The ultimate measure of the 2027 Peace Accord will therefore not be the number of signatures obtained at the ceremony.
“Its success will be measured by the number of political actors who kept their promises when the contest became difficult, when victory appeared uncertain, and when the temptation to deploy hate, violence, ethnic profiling or misinformation became greatest.
“That is where the real test of the Accord lies.”
The post 2027 Peace Accord not uhuru for credible electoral process – CSOs, lawyers appeared first on Vanguard News.
Follow the story
