Headline

Five Factors That May Affect Outcome Of 2023 Presidential Election

Published

3 years ago

February 24, 2023

In a few hours from now, 87,209,007 Nigerians will troop to 176, 606 polling units across the country to elect a new President in a presidential election that marks 24 years of uninterrupted democratic experience in Nigeria.

As of February 5, being the deadline for the collection of the Permanent Voter Cards nationwide, 6,259,229 registered voters did not turn up to collect theirs to qualify to vote.

Indeed, Nigerians are looking at electing the next president who will take over on May 29, 2023 upon the completion of the two tenures of President Muhammadu Buhari.

A breakdown of the total eligible voter figure by states by the Independent National Electoral Commission showed that Lagos State has the highest number of collected PVCs with 6,214,970, followed by Kano State with 5,594,193; Kaduna State, 4,164,473, while Ekiti State has the least with 958,052.

There are 18 candidates from different political parties jostling for the position seat but the top four leading candidates are Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party; Bola Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress, Peter Obi of the Labour Party and Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso of the New Nigeria People’s Party.

In this report, The PUNCH critically assesses five major factors that could decide the outcome of tomorrow’s election:

1. Ethnicity and regionalism

From time past, Nigerians have always played the ethnic and regional cards in elections. In fact, it has always been the case of “the person is our son, let him do it”. Not a few Nigerians believe that electing someone from their region or ethnic group will bring massive development to them.

Since the advent of the Fourth Republic in 1999, there has been an unwritten law that presidential power should rotate every eight years between the North and South, political leaders are agreed that due to the heterogeneous nature of the country, power rotation arrangement had become necessary to address complaints of marginalisation and domination, and to give equal power to ethnic groups.

Zoning has worked well leading to a seamless transfer of power by former president, Olusegun Obasanjo who ruled for eight years, to Musa Yar’ Adua, a Northerner.

This is what brought about the clamour for ‘Emilokan’ (a terminology indicating that it is the time of Yoruba) by the APC’s candidate who publicly said he supported Buhari to emerge as the President.

The South East is not also backing down in their agitation for the presidency because they believe that they have been sidelined well enough since the return of civil rule in 1999.

It is believed this was what led for the call for secession and the call by the apex socio-cultural group, Ohanaeze Ndigbo, that endorsed the Labour Party’s candidate.

2. Religion

Religion is also an important factor that will determine the outcome of Saturday’s election. Since 1999, there has always been a balance in the selection of President and Vice President of all the parties in power.

For instance, if the presidential candidate is a Muslim, he will ensure to choose a Christian as his running mate.

While the North is predominantly Muslim, the South is predominantly Christian.

This balance was however upset when Tinubu, a Yoruba Muslim, chose Kashim Shettima, a Kanuri Muslim and former governor of Borno State, as his running mate.

This action led to widespread condemnation from many Nigerians and Christian bodies.

So, as it stands now, many voters may have to pitch their tent with people of their religious inclination.

3. Possible emergence of third force party

Prior to this dispensation, Nigeria’s political space had been dominated by the PDP until February 2013 when the Action Congress of Nigeria, the Congress for Progressive Change, and the All Nigeria Peoples Party along with a breakaway faction of the All Progressives Grand Alliance formed a coalition and established the APC.

The newly formed coalition defeated the incumbent President, Goodluck Jonathan thus heralding an era of a two-party dominant state. Saturday’s election however could change the narrative with the LP and NNPP looking towards changing the electoral dynamics.

Obi’s supporters popularly called the ‘Obidient’ Movement chiefly constituted by the youths believe that the Labour Party candidate will bring about great change to the country’s political space.

Obi’s candidacy has been endorsed by Ohanaeze Ndigbo, and some influential non-Igbo groups and individuals, including former president Olusegun Obasanjo.

Another candidate is the NNPP’s Kwankwaso, the founder of the Kwankwasiya movement, who is regarded as a grassroots organiser. He is believed to be popular with ordinary people in the North but is thought to lack a strong following in the South.

4. Money

With the persistent cash crunch experienced currently in the country, vote-buying may mitigate the outcome of Saturday’s presidential election.

Nigeria is not yet ripe for a democratic election uninfluenced by vote-trading as it has become an important factor that reinvigorates voters to come out to their polling units.

Recently, some party chairmen of one of the political parties were reported to be clamouring for mobilisation fees from the presidential candidate or they would truncate the elections.

Despite measures to improve the transparency of the electoral system, it is likely that money will remain a big factor in the 2023 elections.

5. Fear of violence

Nigeria’s political history is replete with accounts of violent election conduct and behaviours by actors at election venues.

The 2023 general election is itself foreshadowed by rising insecurity in many parts of the country. The obvious outcome is that voters could be too scared to come out to exercise their franchise leading to high voter apathy.

In fact, some local governments in Borno and Zamfara states have created super camps for indigenes that have been displaced from their homes in order not to deprive them of their right to vote.

In some other places, some people might not come out because of the fear of being attacked when the result is not going the way of the areas of the dominant party.

Headline

Afghanistan-Pakistan Border Clashes Escalate After Alleged Air Strikes

Published

2 days ago

October 11, 2025

Editor

Afghanistan’s Taliban forces launched armed reprisals against Pakistani soldiers along the shared border on Saturday, accusing Islamabad of carrying out air strikes on its soil, senior officials from several provinces said Saturday.

On Thursday, two explosions were heard in the Afghan capital and another in the southeast of the country. The following day, the Taliban-run defence ministry blamed the attacks on Pakistan, accusing its neighbor of violating its sovereignty.

“In retaliation for air strikes carried out by the Pakistani army on Kabul,” Taliban forces are engaged “in heavy clashes against Pakistani security forces in various areas” along the border, the Afghan military said in a statement.

Islamabad did not confirm that it was behind Thursday’s attacks, but called on Kabul “to stop harbouring the Pakistani Taliban (TTP) on its soil.”

The TTP, trained in combat in Afghanistan and claiming to share the same ideology as the Afghan Taliban, is accused by Islamabad of having killed hundreds of its soldiers since 2021.

Taliban officials from Kunar, Nangarhar, Paktia, Khost, and Helmand provinces — all located on the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan — confirmed that clashes were ongoing.

“This evening, Taliban forces began using weapons. We fired first light and then heavy artillery at four points along the border,” a senior official in Pakistan’s Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa province, bordering Afghanistan, told AFP.

“Pakistani forces responded with heavy fire and shot down three Afghan quadcopters suspected of carrying explosives. Intense fighting continues, but so far, no casualties have been reported,” he continued.

– Uptick in violence –

In recent months, TTP militants have intensified their campaign of violence against Pakistani security forces in the mountainous areas bordering Afghanistan.

Islamabad accuses Afghanistan of failing to expel militants who use Afghan territory to launch attacks on Pakistan, an accusation denied by authorities in Kabul.

The TTP and its affiliates are behind most of the violence — largely directed at security forces.

Earlier this year, a UN report said the TTP “receive substantial logistical and operational support from the de facto authorities”, referring to the Taliban government in Kabul.

Pakistani Defence Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif told parliament on Thursday that several efforts to convince the Afghan Taliban to stop backing the TTP had failed.

“We will not tolerate this any longer,” Asif said. “United, we must respond to those facilitating them, whether the hideouts are on our soil or Afghan soil.”

Earlier Saturday, the TTP claimed responsibility for deadly attacks in several districts in northwest Pakistan that killed 20 security officials and three civilians.

AFP

Headline

Taliban Attacks Kill 23 In Northwestern Pakistan

Published

2 days ago

October 11, 2025

Editor

The Pakistani Taliban on Saturday claimed responsibility for deadly attacks in several northwestern districts that killed 20 security officials and three civilians.

The attacks, which included a suicide bombing on a police training school, were carried out on Friday in several districts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province that borders Afghanistan.

Militancy has surged in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa since the withdrawal of US-led troops from neighbouring Afghanistan in 2021 and the return of the Taliban government in Kabul.

Eleven paramilitary troops were killed in the border Khyber district, while seven policemen were killed after a suicide bomber rammed an explosives-laden car into the gate of a police training school, which was followed by a gun attack.

Five people, including three civilians, were killed in a separate clash in Bajaur district, security officials told AFP on Saturday.

The Pakistani Taliban, the Tehreek-e-Taliban (TTP), claimed responsibility for the attacks in messages on social media. The group is separate from but closely linked with the Afghan Taliban.

The attacks came hours after Afghanistan’s Taliban government accused Pakistan of “violating Kabul’s sovereign territory”, a day after two explosions were heard in the capital.

Pakistan did not say if it was behind the blasts in Kabul, but said it had the right to defend itself against surging border militancy.

Islamabad accuses Afghanistan of failing to expel militants using Afghan territory to launch attacks on Pakistan, an accusation that authorities in Kabul deny.

The TTP and its affiliates are behind most of the violence — largely directed at security forces.

Including Friday’s attacks, at least 32 Pakistani troops and three civilians have been killed this week alone in the border regions.

AFP

Headline

US Threatens To Sanction Countries That Vote For Shipping Carbon Tax

Published

2 days ago

October 11, 2025

Editor

The United States on Friday threatened to impose sanctions and take other punitive action against any country that votes in favor of a carbon tax on maritime transportation to be implemented through a UN agency.

“We will fight hard to protect our economic interests by imposing costs on countries if they support” the Net Zero Framework, said a joint statement by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and his counterparts at the departments of energy and transportation.

Members of the London-based International Maritime Organization (IMO) are set to vote next week on the adoption of the Net Zero Framework (NZF) agreement aimed at reducing global carbon emissions from the shipping sector.

Washington, however, described the proposal as imposing “a global carbon tax on the world.”

Since returning to power in January, US President Donald Trump has reversed Washington’s course on climate change, denouncing it as a “scam” and encouraging fossil fuel use by deregulation.

In the statement, Rubio, Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said the Trump administration “unequivocally rejects” the NZF proposal.

They threatened a range of punishing actions against countries that vote in favor of the framework, including: visa restrictions; blocking vessels registered in those countries from US ports; imposing commercial penalties; and considering sanctions on officials.

“The United States will be moving to levy these remedies against nations that sponsor this European-led neocolonial export of global climate regulations,” the statement said.