2023: Obi’s claim of victory without evidence contradicts logic, says Oladele

The Chairman of the Planning Committee of the Ogun State APC Presidential and Gubernatorial Campaign Council, Hon. Kayode Oladele, has criticised former Labour Party presidential candidate, Peter Obi, over his recent BBC interview, describing his insistence that he won the 2023 presidential election despite acknowledging that he could not substantiate the claim with evidence as logically inconsistent.

Oladele said Obi’s remarks exposed what he described as a fundamental misunderstanding of the distinction between personal conviction and verifiable evidence, particularly in determining the outcome of a democratic election.

Reacting to the interview conducted by BBC Africa journalist, Madina Maishanu, the former federal lawmaker expressed surprise that Obi would continue to claim victory in the February 25, 2023 presidential election despite the judicial proceedings that followed the contest.

He identified Obi’s response to questions about the evidence supporting his claim as the most troubling aspect of the interview, arguing that personal belief could not substitute for proof in determining electoral outcomes.

“You cannot insist that you won a presidential election and, when asked to substantiate that assertion, retreat into personal belief. The presidency is not awarded on the strength of conviction. Elections are decided through constitutional procedures, and allegations challenging their outcomes must be supported by credible evidence,” Oladele said.

The former lawmaker recalled that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) declared President Bola Ahmed Tinubu the winner of the election, with Obi finishing third behind former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, the presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

He noted that Obi subsequently challenged the result before the Presidential Election Petition Court, which dismissed his petition in September 2023. The Supreme Court subsequently affirmed Tinubu’s election in October of the same year.

Oladele, who also represents Ogun State as a Federal Commissioner at the Federal Character Commission, argued that the judicial history of the election made Obi’s continued claim of victory a matter deserving further scrutiny.

“Peter Obi went to court. He had the opportunity to present his evidence, advance his arguments and seek the remedies available under the Constitution. The courts examined the issues and delivered their judgments.

“Yet, he continues to insist that he won the election while acknowledging that he has no evidence to establish that claim. What exactly are Nigerians expected to make of such a contradiction?” he asked.

Oladele argued that accepting personal conviction as sufficient grounds to overturn an election result would undermine the principles governing electoral disputes and constitutional adjudication.

“Are we now to accept that a politician’s personal conviction is sufficient to overturn an election result or invalidate the findings of the courts? If that becomes the standard, then we might as well dispense with electoral laws, evidence and judicial proceedings altogether,” he said.

He maintained that the controversy extended beyond Obi’s personal position, raising broader questions about truth, accountability and intellectual consistency in democratic political discourse.

According to him, political claims, regardless of how frequently they are repeated or how strongly they are expressed, must be supported by verifiable facts.

“An allegation does not become a fact because it is repeated at political rallies, television studios or international interviews. Neither does the intensity of a politician’s conviction relieve him of the responsibility to substantiate his claims.

“If the evidence exists, Nigerians deserve to see it. If it does not, the allegation must be understood for what it is: an assertion that has not been established,” Oladele said.

He added that democracy could not function effectively if defeated candidates were allowed to declare themselves winners without presenting credible evidence to support their claims.

Oladele also questioned Obi’s reported suggestion during the interview that not everything was based on evidence, describing the position as particularly concerning when applied to the determination of electoral outcomes.

While acknowledging that personal beliefs could influence political opinions, he insisted that such beliefs could not replace evidence in the administration of justice or the determination of constitutional rights.

“The law does not operate on the principle that a person must be believed simply because he speaks with confidence. That is precisely why courts exist, why witnesses testify, why documentary evidence is examined and why the burden of proof rests on the person making an allegation.

“As a lawyer, I find it remarkable that anyone would seek to sustain a categorical claim of electoral victory while simultaneously acknowledging an inability to establish it with evidence. The two positions are fundamentally inconsistent,” he said.

The APC chieftain further criticised what he described as a growing tendency among some political actors to interpret unfavourable electoral outcomes as evidence of manipulation without first establishing the specific facts supporting such allegations.

He warned that the practice could erode public confidence in democratic institutions by encouraging citizens to place political sentiment above verifiable evidence.

“Democracy cannot survive on selective acceptance of electoral outcomes. We cannot have a political culture in which an election is considered credible only when a preferred candidate wins and fraudulent whenever that candidate loses,” Oladele said.

He maintained that political disagreements over election results should be addressed through established legal and constitutional mechanisms rather than sustained solely by personal conviction.

“Peter Obi may continue to insist that he won the 2023 presidential election. However, the fundamental question remains unanswered: Where is the evidence?

“Until that question is answered with credible and verifiable facts, his assertion remains a personal claim rather than an established electoral result. That is the distinction every serious democracy must insist upon,” he added.