By Yusuf Danjuma Yunusa

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has fixed February 20, 2027, for the conduct of the Presidential and National Assembly elections, with governorship and State Houses of Assembly polls scheduled for March 6, 2027.

INEC Chairman, Prof. Joash Amupitan, announced the dates at a press conference in Abuja on Friday, formally unveiling the commission’s timetable and schedule of activities for the 2027 general elections.

The announcement comes against the backdrop of concerns over the delayed passage of the amended Electoral Act currently before the National Assembly. Stakeholders have expressed apprehension that uncertainty surrounding the legal framework could complicate preparations for the next electoral cycle.

INEC had earlier, on February 4, disclosed that it had concluded work on the election timetable despite the pending amendment. The commission said it had forwarded the proposed schedule to lawmakers to guide legislative considerations.

However, the electoral body cautioned that certain activities outlined in the timetable may be subject to adjustment depending on when the amended Electoral Act is eventually passed and assented to.

The release of the dates signals the formal commencement of preparations for the 2027 polls, providing political parties, aspirants and other stakeholders with a clearer framework for planning, even as attention remains focused on the evolving legal landscape that will govern the elections.

By Yusuf Danjuma Yunusa & Abbas Yushau Yusuf

February 13 marks exactly 50 years since General Murtala Ramat Muhammed was assassinated in a failed coup attempt that shook Nigeria to its core. His death on that Friday morning in 1976 was not merely the killing of a Head of State; it was a brutal reminder of how fragile political power can be when the barrel of a gun becomes the pathway to leadership.

Half a century later, Nigeria stands under democratic rule, yet the memory of coups still lingers like a warning siren in the nation’s political subconscious.

Muhammed himself came to power through a military coup in 1975, toppling General Yakubu Gowon. His own assassination less than seven months later, during an abortive coup led by dissident officers, reinforced the inherent instability of governance born out of force. Coups promise swift correction, but they often deliver cycles of uncertainty, repression and further violence.

The danger of military coups to democracy is not theoretical; it is historical fact. Military regimes centralise authority, suspend constitutional order and weaken civilian institutions. Even when they promise reform, they operate outside the consent of the governed. The culture they breed — command-and-control politics — can outlive their uniforms, seeping into civilian administrations long after soldiers return to the barracks.

Nigeria’s post-independence history reads like a ledger of interrupted transitions: 1966, 1975, 1983, 1985, 1993. Each intervention reset the political clock but deepened structural fragilities. Civil institutions were stunted. Political parties became vehicles of patronage rather than ideology. Trust between citizens and the state eroded.

Today, the guns are silent, and ballots have replaced bullets as instruments of power. Yet the shadow of military interruption remains instructive, especially at a time when frustration with democratic governance is rising across the country.

The uncomfortable truth is that democracy, while intact procedurally, is struggling substantively. Elections are held regularly, but economic hardship persists. Institutions exist, but public confidence in them is thin. The Constitution guarantees rights, yet citizens often feel unheard in matters of security, employment and welfare.

This disconnect between democratic form and democratic outcome creates a dangerous vacuum. When people begin to question whether democracy delivers tangible improvement to their lives, nostalgia for “strongman efficiency” can quietly resurface. It is a perilous sentiment. History shows that military rule may appear decisive, but it rarely produces sustainable prosperity or inclusive governance.

The lesson from Murtala Muhammed’s assassination is not simply about the vulnerability of leaders; it is about the vulnerability of systems built without deep institutional roots. Democracies collapse when institutions are hollowed out, when the judiciary is weakened, when legislatures lose independence and when accountability becomes selective.

Equally, democracy fails when it becomes distant from the daily struggles of the masses. Nigeria today grapples with inflation, unemployment, insecurity and widening inequality. For many citizens, the promise of 1999 — that civilian rule would bring stability and opportunity — feels deferred. This perception does not justify military intervention, but it does expose the urgent need for democratic renewal.

A coup does not cure governance failure; it compounds it. It replaces flawed accountability with none at all. It silences dissent rather than addressing its root causes. The real antidote to democratic disappointment is not regression to authoritarian shortcuts but reform within constitutional boundaries.

Fifty years after Murtala Muhammed’s assassination, Nigeria’s greatest safeguard against instability is not the strength of its armed forces but the credibility of its democratic institutions. The military must remain firmly subordinate to civilian authority, while civilian leaders must govern in ways that justify that authority.

Democracy cannot survive on ritual alone. It must deliver justice, equity and measurable improvement in citizens’ lives. When it does not, cynicism grows. And when cynicism grows unchecked, history’s darker chapters begin to look deceptively attractive.

The anniversary of 1976 should therefore serve as both memorial and mirror — a memorial to a turbulent past and a mirror reflecting present responsibilities. Nigeria has paid dearly for power seized by force. The challenge now is ensuring that democracy does not lose legitimacy through neglect, inequity or arrogance.

The gun once interrupted Nigeria’s future. The ballot must not be allowed to lose its meaning.

General Murtala Muhammad’s legacy will continue to remain fresh in the memory of patriotic Nigerians.

The constitutional democracy Nigeria is enjoying today is the brainchild of the late General Murtala Muhammad, who addressed the nation with vigour and instilled confidence.

His phrase “Immediate effect” remains the phrase successive Nigerian leaders have used to command respect and to show Nigerians they are very serious about formulating and implementing policies for the progress of all.

Despite military rule being an aberration, General Murtala Muhammad’s assassination was backward and retrogressive to the development of Nigeria, which many will continue to mourn for decades to come.

As General Murtala Muhammad clocks five decades after passing to the great beyond, the Nigerian Government should mandate a topic for Nigerian children in the country’s civic education curriculum so that those yet unborn will feel the impact of Nigeria’s great leader lost to the hands of retrogressive assassins on that fateful Friday, February 13th, 1976, which is exactly five decades today.

Adieu, great son of Nigeria and great son of Kano.

By Yusuf Danjuma Yunusa

The legal team of former Kaduna State Governor, Malam Nasir Ahmad El-Rufai, on Thursday condemned what it described as an unlawful attempt by security operatives to arrest their client upon his arrival at the Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport, Abuja.

In a statement issued in Abuja and signed by Ubong Esop Akpan of The Chambers of Ubong Akpan, counsel to El-Rufai, the lawyers alleged that operatives of the Department of State Services (DSS) attempted to arrest the former governor without presenting a warrant or formal invitation.

According to the statement, El-Rufai arrived in Abuja aboard Egypt Air flight MS 877 from Cairo when security agents moved to detain him.

The legal team argued that the invitation earlier issued by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) was delivered to El-Rufai’s residence while he was out of the country, describing any demand for immediate appearance as “illogical and impractical.”

The lawyers said they had formally communicated with the EFCC since December 2025, assuring the Commission that El-Rufai would honour the invitation upon his return. They further stated that the EFCC was notified that he would voluntarilyx appear at its office by 10:00 a.m. on Monday, February 16, 2026.

They described the alleged attempt to arrest him despite this commitment as arbitrary and a violation of due process.

The statement further alleged that security operatives seized El-Rufai’s international passport during the encounter, an action the legal team characterised as unlawful.

Citing provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), the lawyers contended that the attempted arrest breached their client’s fundamental rights, including the right to personal liberty, fair hearing, dignity of the human person, freedom of movement and right to own property.

“No government agency possesses unfettered authority to detain citizens without due process,” the statement read, adding that all state institutions are bound by constitutional safeguards.

The legal team demanded the “immediate and unconditional cessation” of any attempt to detain El-Rufai, the return of his passport, and a formal apology for what it termed an infringement on his rights and dignity.

It also maintained that the former governor would honour all legitimate law enforcement summons and would not evade lawful investigation.

The lawyers warned that legal action would be pursued against individuals and agencies allegedly responsible for the incident, stressing that the judiciary remains the proper avenue for resolving the matter.

As of press time, there was no official response from the DSS or the EFCC regarding the allegations.