Osun Election: Senator Fadahunsi’s ‘Kill Accord Members’ Remark Raises Alarms As Violence Claims Mount

OSOGBO: This is not how democracy is supposed to sound. Four days before Osun voters choose their governor, a viral video has placed Senator Francis Fadahunsi at the centre of a fresh political violence controversy.

The Osun East senator is heard addressing supporters in Yoruba and making remarks interpreted as directing them to “kill” members of the Accord Party.

He also reportedly said Accord supporters should not be allowed to vote, even if they arrived with Permanent Voter Cards.

The remarks have triggered demands for police investigation and renewed fears over the safety of voters ahead of Saturday’s governorship election.

ValidViewNetwork reports that several news organisations have independently reported the contents of the video and identified Fadahunsi as the speaker.

The reported translation includes the words: “From now on, whenever you see Accord members, kill them. I authorise you to kill them.”

The reported statement goes further.

Fadahunsi is also heard saying that Accord members have wives and children, before reportedly insisting that they should not be allowed to vote.

The political context makes the statement even more disturbing. The people being discussed are not foreign combatants.

They are Nigerian citizens.They are residents of Osun State. They include voters, parents, workers, traders and young people exercising a constitutional political choice.

They may support Accord today and another party tomorrow. That is the essence of democracy.

This is bigger than APC versus Accord

Political parties are expected to fight elections. They are expected to attack policies. They are expected to expose failures. They are expected to mobilise voters. They are expected to compete fiercely for power.

They are not expected to turn political disagreement into a death sentence. A senator should understand that distinction better than most people.

Fadahunsi is not an ordinary campaign spectator. He is a member of Nigeria’s National Assembly. He participates in making laws that govern the same citizens he represents. The people supporting Accord are therefore not his enemies. They are constituents.

The people voting against him are not his enemies. They are constituents. The people criticising him are not his enemies. They are constituents. That distinction is fundamental.

Once an elected representative begins to see political opponents as people who should be eliminated rather than citizens whose votes he must compete for, representative democracy becomes dangerously distorted.

And Osun already has a violence problem

The timing could hardly be worse.Osun’s governorship election has already been overshadowed by allegations of political killings, shootings, attacks and intimidation.

Recent reports have described a growing cycle of violence and blame between rival political camps. One recent report cited 18 deaths amid rising fears of further violence before the election.

Another report cited police documentation of at least 30 politically motivated killings in the state. Civil society organisations have also protested what they described as a wave of political violence and killings in Osun.

The growing concern has forced security agencies to repeatedly address the issue. ValidViewNetwork reports that Inspector-General of Police Olatunji Disu recently acknowledged concerns over election security, violence, voter intimidation and political thuggery ahead of the poll.

He assured stakeholders that the police would remain impartial and work towards a peaceful, credible election. That makes the Fadahunsi video impossible to treat as an isolated political joke.It comes against a background in which political violence is already one of the biggest fears surrounding the election.

Not even military rule?

There is an uncomfortable historical question here.Nigeria’s military governments were brutal. They suspended democratic institutions.

They detained political opponents. They restricted political activity. They ruled through decrees rather than electoral mandates. But that history should never become an excuse for today’s politicians to normalise language calling for citizens to be killed because of their political affiliation.

Democracy was supposed to change that.The whole point of elections is to replace violence with ballots. The ballot box is supposed to accomplish what the gun cannot.

A politician who loses an election is supposed to go home. A voter who supports the losing candidate is supposed to remain alive.

That is not an advanced theory of democracy.It is the minimum requirement.

What about Fadahunsi’s explanation?

There is another important fact that must not be ignored. Following the controversy, Fadahunsi reportedly clarified his remarks. According to Punch, the senator said he did not mean that Accord members should literally be killed.

He said he was referring to defeating them politically and taking their votes. That clarification must be placed on record. But it does not erase the controversy.

If the intended meaning was simply to defeat Accord at the polls, then the choice of language was extraordinarily reckless.

There is a vast difference between saying:“Defeat Accord.” “Take their votes.”“Stop them from winning.” And saying:“Kill them.”

Words matter. Especially when they are spoken by a senator.

Especially four days before an election.

Especially in a state already dealing with allegations of political killings.

The voter is not political property

There is another part of the reported statement that deserves particular attention. The reported suggestion that Accord supporters should not be allowed to vote, even if they possess Permanent Voter Cards, goes directly to the heart of electoral democracy.

A Permanent Voter Card does not belong to a political party. It belongs to the voter. A voter does not surrender his constitutional rights because he wears the wrong party colour.

A voter does not become less Nigerian because he votes against the senator’s preferred candidate. The political class must understand this distinction.

ValidViewNetwork reports that the central danger in election violence is not merely that people can be physically attacked.

The deeper danger is that citizens begin to believe they must choose between political obedience and personal safety.

Once that happens, an election stops being a democratic contest.It becomes an exercise in intimidation.

What should the police do?

This is where the responsibility of the police becomes unavoidable. The Inspector-General of Police, Olatunji Disu, has already publicly spoken about the need to prevent violence and intimidation during the Osun election.

Now there is a viral video involving a serving senator. The appropriate response is not political speculation. It is investigation.

If the video is authentic, investigators should establish precisely what was said, what was intended, who was present and whether any law was breached.

If the statement was mistranslated, the senator should be allowed to establish that clearly.

If it was political rhetoric rather than a literal instruction, that should also be established.

If an offence was committed, the law should take its course.

That is how a democracy should respond.Not through retaliation. Not through counter-threats. Not through partisan justice.

Through evidence and law.

The real test of Osun 2026

The most important question is no longer whether APC can defeat Accord. It is whether Osun can conduct an election in which an Accord voter can walk into a polling unit, cast a ballot and walk home safely.

The same protection must apply to an APC voter. The same protection must apply to an Adeleke supporter. The same protection must apply to every political party registered for the election.

Democracy does not protect only the people who vote correctly. It protects the right to vote incorrectly, according to somebody else’s political preference.

That is precisely why elections exist. ValidViewNetwork reports that Osun’s politicians have a final opportunity to lower the temperature before voters go to the polls.

They should use it. Campaigns should be about roads, schools, hospitals, agriculture, jobs, security, salaries, investment and the future of Osun.

Not about who should be killed.

Not about who should be prevented from voting.

Not about whose supporters should be hunted.

The people of Osun are not ammunition for politicians. They are the electorate. They are the sovereign authority from which elected officials derive their mandate.

And on August 15, their greatest weapon should be the ballot. Not the bullet.