{
  "id": 326873,
  "title": "OPINION: When losing becomes unthinkable, and democracy pays the price",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/08/07/opinion-when-losing-becomes-unthinkable-and-democracy-pays-the-price",
  "topic": "world",
  "section": "World",
  "published": "2026-08-07T08:38:40.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "Ripples Nigeria",
    "slug": "ripples-nigeria",
    "url": "https://www.ripplesnigeria.com/opinion-when-losing-becomes-unthinkable-and-democracy-pays-the-price/"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "President Bola Tinubu recently stated, \"all is fair in politics,\" likely referring to his future 2027 election. However, such a remark by a sitting president raises serious concerns. A president wields significant power, shapes public institutions, and sets the tone for political behavior. Politics should not be considered a game without rules or consequences, especially when the leader leads the government. Believing that anything goes in politics is not clever or sophisticated; it is a risky mindset that prioritizes staying in power over governing for the good of democracy.\n\nLeaders often take their worst decisions when they fear losing more than they care about governing effectively. When this fear is evident, it provides others with an opportunity to take advantage of a leader's desperation to remain in power. President Tinubu appears to be more concerned about what his party, loyalists, and close circle think rather than what ordinary Nigerians want. Individuals with their own interests notice when a leader is so focused on staying in power that he ignores warning signs. They remain loyal, support his views, and say what they think will keep them close to power. The advice they receive becomes as crucial as the decisions they make. Advisers may overstate successes, ignore genuine criticism, and label any hard truths as opposition propaganda to maintain their positions of influence.\n\nDaniel Bwala is one example of an adviser whose public statements should be scrutinized more closely. The issue lies in whether those around President Tinubu are providing truthful advice about Nigeria or merely defending the government without reservation. Bwala's arguments began to lose credibility for me after his appearance on Al Jazeera with Mehdi Hasan, where he continued defending the government even when presented with evidence. Advisers who consistently defend the government may struggle to offer the candid advice a president needs during difficult times.\n\nCritics, including bishops, journalists, civil society groups, and ordinary Nigerians, should not be subjected to attacks merely for discussing hardship, insecurity, and frustration. Their role is not to make the government feel good but to share information that the leaders might prefer to avoid. If the presidency doubts every critic's motives, it risks missing vital information needed to govern effectively. Ignoring criticism can also diminish trust in state institutions' fairness. Recently, the EFCC froze an account belonging to the Osun State Government just days before a governorship election, while President Tinubu was in office. While the action might have been legally justified, the timing raised suspicions and created the impression that federal power could influence the election. Even if the decision was legally sound, acting so close to an election in an opposition state could harm public trust.\n\nInstitutions must carefully consider not only whether they can act but also if the timing could appear as interference. Leaders are accountable not only for their personal orders but also for the political climate created by the institutions they oversee. When the public suspects that a government is eager to consolidate power, actions taken by institutions at the wrong time can exacerbate these suspicions. History demonstrates how a fear of losing can impair judgment, erode legitimacy, and lead leaders away from the political fate they were trying to avoid. Richard Nixon's attempts to protect his presidency during the Watergate scandal ultimately resulted in his resignation in 1974. Similarly, Robert Mugabe's relentless pursuit of power for nearly four decades weakened institutions, fueled succession conflicts, and ultimately led to his resignation in 2017. Both leaders, once considered untouchable, found their authority stripped away when they stopped listening to those around them. This highlights the danger of prioritizing survival over listening, especially for leaders like Tinubu who appear disconnected from the lives of ordinary Nigerians.",
  "summary": "President Bola Tinubu recently said, “all is fair in politics.” He may have meant it as a confident comment from someone already thinking about the 2027 election. But when a sitting president says this, it means more. A president holds great power, shapes public institutions, and sets the tone for political behaviour. Politics should not […] The post OPINION: When losing becomes unthinkable, and…",
  "key_points": [],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}