Human rights lawyer Kola Alapinni has warned against treating current political developments as proof that the result of the 2027 presidential election is already known.
Alapinni, a United States Secretary of State Awardee on International Religious Freedom, made the comment in a statement on Monday titled, “A Forecast Is Not a Verdict: Why The Economist Misreads 2027.”
He was reacting to an October 1 report by The Economist, titled “Nigerians Dislike Their President, But May Re-elect Him Anyway,” which examined factors that could influence President Bola Tinubu’s chances of returning to office.
The publication pointed to factors including Tinubu’s incumbency advantage, divisions among opposition politicians, religion, voter participation and political frustration.
However, Alapinni argued that these factors should not be interpreted as a guarantee of what will happen in 2027.
“A forecast is not a verdict,” he said, noting that Nigeria’s political situation could change significantly before the election.
He also questioned the argument that the opposition’s current inability to form a strong alliance would automatically work in favour of the ruling party.
While admitting that a divided opposition could make things easier for the incumbent, Alapinni said there was still enough time for political alliances to change.
“The Economist’s error is to treat the absence of a coalition today as proof that none can be punished into existence by January,” he wrote.
The lawyer also challenged the suggestion that religion would be the major factor determining how people vote in the North and Middle Belt.
He referred to polling by SBM Intelligence mentioned in The Economist’s report, saying it showed Tinubu behind Peter Obi and Atiku Abubakar in Borno.
“Low expectations are not consent,” Alapinni wrote, arguing that insecurity and the economic situation could play a major role in voters’ decisions.
He further noted that insecurity in Plateau and Benue could affect elections in those areas, particularly because displacement and disruption to farming communities could prevent some residents from reaching polling units.
Alapinni also disagreed with the idea that widespread political frustration would automatically make Nigerians stay away from the polls.
“That misreads anger as apathy,” he wrote, saying Nigerians facing hardship, insecurity and poor public services could instead use their votes to express dissatisfaction with the government.
He also highlighted electricity as an issue that could influence voters ahead of the election.
“If he does not provide power, he should not be voted for. That is the test the magazine never sets,” he wrote.
Despite his criticism, Alapinni agreed that the ruling party has certain advantages going into the election.
He said incumbents can benefit from political structures, financial resources and established voter mobilisation networks. He also acknowledged that a fragmented opposition could make it harder for challengers to build a strong national campaign.
Alapinni equally recognised concerns around insecurity, vote-buying and possible political influence over election logistics and security.
However, he stressed that these concerns should not be confused with proof that the election result has already been decided.
“Influence over logistics and security agencies is a real risk. It is not proof that INEC will write a result,” he wrote.
According to him, Tinubu’s position as an incumbent gives him an advantage, but that advantage does not amount to guaranteed victory.
“A forecast that the disliked incumbent may survive is a statement about cash, split votes, and unsafe roads. It is not a statement that the record has been accepted,” he wrote.
Alapinni said the eventual winner would ultimately depend on whether Nigerians can participate freely and exercise their right to vote.
“Neither camp should read this as arrival. A week is a long time in politics. It is not yet Uhuru,” he said.
