Segun Showunmi’s lastest unwarranted outburst and assertion against opposition political parties that the laws of the land (Electoral Act) prohibits political parties from releasing or publishing election results duly obtained and collated by their agents, and that doing so amounts to treason, is not merely unsupported by the statutory provisions examined; it is a reckless, baseless and legally indefensible claim that misrepresents the law and risks intimidating citizens through a wholly unwarranted threat of criminal liability.
Section 60(2)–(4) of the Electoral Act 2026 provides for signed result forms, copies to polling agents and announcement of results at polling units. Section 62 governs post-election procedures and collation, while Sections 66 and 68 provide for official declarations and INEC’s publication of results. None of these provisions expressly prohibits a political party from independently compiling and publishing figures obtained from its agents’ lawful copies of result sheets. Any suggestion to the contrary is not a serious interpretation of the statute; it is an assertion without textual foundation.
Section 39(1) of the 1999 Constitution guarantees also freedom of expression, including the right to impart information. Treason, by contrast, is a specific criminal offence defined by law; Section 37 of the Criminal Code Act addresses levying war against the State with the requisite intent. Publishing independently but officially collated election figures does not, without additional legally relevant conduct, satisfy that definition. To label such publication “treason” without identifying the necessary elements of the offence is not legal analysis, it is inflammatory distortion designed to frighten political actors and the public into silence.
Showunmi should remember that being a spokesman is not a licence for narratological manipulation or reckless legal grandstanding. It demands principled, informed and constructive engagement, not alarmism, intimidation or the posture of a political attack dog. A spokesman who invokes the gravest offence against the State must be held to an especially high standard of accuracy; he cannot casually convert a lawful act of political communication into a capital accusation merely because it conflicts with his preferred narrative.
His recent political realignment does not excuse careless legal pronouncements seemingly designed to outdo himself before his new political allies. Political loyalty cannot substitute for statutory authority, and partisan enthusiasm cannot transform an unsupported allegation into law. If anything, his new alignment makes the need for restraint, precision and intellectual honesty even more urgent.
A final word to Showunmi: Cite the specific section of the law that criminalises the independent publication of duly obtained election results, identify the precise elements of the alleged offence, or withdraw the allegation that doing so constitutes treason. Nigeria’s democracy deserves informed debate, not reckless legal intimidation dressed up as political commentary. The law is not a weapon for frightening citizens into silence, and no spokesman, regardless of his political patron, stands above the obligation to speak responsibly, accurately and honestly.
Alex Ter Adum, PhD
D-37 Policy Reform Think Tank.
