WHO IS AFRAID OF OPPOSITION IN ENUGU? "A Conspiracies Of Silence"

 

The continued alleged attacks on opposition parties raise troubling questions about political tolerance, public safety and the responsibility of security agencies to protect every citizen, regardless of political affiliation.

There are questions that a society must ask when silence begins to surround disturbing events. There are questions that demand answers when people become afraid to express their political opinions, associate with their preferred parties or participate freely in the democratic process.

And there is one question that deserves an urgent and honest answer in Enugu State: Who is afraid of opposition?

Who is afraid of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) and the Peoples Democratic Front (PDF)? Why should the activities of opposition parties generate concerns about the safety of their members? Why should any political group, regardless of its numerical strength or electoral prospects, have to worry about its right to organise, mobilise supporters and participate in the democratic process?

These are not questions of political convenience. They are questions about the character of our democracy, the protection of fundamental rights and the responsibility of those entrusted with maintaining law and order.

If reports of continued attacks on opposition parties in Enugu are accurate, who is behind them? Who are the sponsors, if any? Who benefits when opposition voices are threatened, intimidated or allegedly attacked? And, perhaps most importantly, who has the power to bring these incidents to an end?

Who is sponsoring the alleged attacks, and what evidence can establish the truth?

This is a question that should not be dismissed, politicised or buried under the weight of partisan arguments.

Are these incidents the actions of individuals acting independently, or is there an organised effort to intimidate political opponents? Are there identifiable perpetrators? Have complaints been formally lodged with the appropriate authorities? What investigations have been conducted, and what have they revealed?

If there are sponsors, who are they? If there are no sponsors, what does the evidence indicate about the people responsible?

The people of Enugu deserve answers grounded in credible investigations, not speculation, rumour or accusations without proof.

Nobody should be condemned without evidence. But neither should genuine concerns about political violence be ignored simply because answering them may be uncomfortable for powerful interests.

Why does the situation appear difficult to stop?

This is another question that demands a clear response from the security agencies operating in Enugu State.

Why should alleged attacks on opposition parties continue to generate anxiety if the state has functioning security institutions? What measures have been taken to protect party members, identify perpetrators and prevent a recurrence? Have the authorities assessed the security risks surrounding opposition meetings and political activities?

If complaints have been made, were they promptly investigated? If suspects have been identified, what lawful steps have been taken? If the authorities have not received formal complaints, what channels are available to affected persons to report threats and obtain protection?

And if the security agencies have acted, why do concerns about the safety of opposition groups persist?

These are fair questions. Asking them is not an attack on the police or any security institution. Rather, it is a call for accountability, transparency and the fulfilment of their constitutional responsibilities.

The Nigeria Police Force and other relevant security agencies must be seen to protect everyone equally. Their responsibility does not begin and end with the protection of government officials or politically influential individuals. It extends to ordinary citizens, party members, community organisers and those whose political opinions differ from those in power.

Is opposition now a threat to peaceful coexistence in Enugu?

Why should the existence of an opposition party be interpreted as an act of hostility? Why should political disagreement become a reason for fear, suspicion or confrontation?

Democracy is not a private estate belonging to the party in government. It is a public institution sustained by the freedom of citizens to choose, question, disagree and demand accountability.

If the NDC or PDF holds a meeting, mobilises supporters, criticises government policies or seeks to persuade voters, which law prohibits such lawful political activities?

If their members break the law, should the appropriate response not be a lawful investigation and prosecution where evidence warrants it, rather than intimidation or violence?

And if they have committed no offence, who has the right to deny them their democratic space?

These questions matter because a political environment in which only one viewpoint can be expressed without fear is not a healthy democratic environment.

What message are these incidents sending to the people of Enugu?

Think about the ordinary citizen who wishes to join an opposition party but hesitates because of reports of attacks. Think about the young person who wants to participate in politics but wonders whether expressing a different opinion could put personal safety at risk.

Think about families who fear for their loved ones, party supporters who feel vulnerable and citizens who increasingly wonder whether political participation is worth the possible consequences.

What happens to democracy when fear replaces freedom? What happens to public confidence when people begin to believe that political affiliation determines whose safety matters? And what becomes of peaceful coexistence when disagreements over leadership are allowed to descend into hostility?

Enugu is a state with a proud history, a vibrant political culture and citizens who deserve an atmosphere of peace, mutual respect and democratic freedom.

No political ambition should be worth the tears of a mother worried about her child. No party rivalry should be worth the injury of an innocent citizen. No contest for political influence should be allowed to destroy the bonds that hold communities together.

The stakes are too high for silence.

What is the position of the political leadership in Enugu State?

Has the state government been adequately briefed on the reported incidents? Has it called for investigations, preventive action and the protection of all lawful political activities? What steps are being taken to ensure that no individual or group interprets political influence as permission to intimidate opponents?

These questions are not allegations against the government. They are questions about leadership and the public interest.

Leadership is tested not only by the ability to win political support but also by the willingness to protect the rights of those who do not offer that support.

A government confident in its democratic credentials should have no reason to fear peaceful opposition. It should welcome a political atmosphere in which disagreements are settled through dialogue, persuasion, lawful competition and the ballot box.

The surest way to silence suspicion is to encourage transparency. The surest way to strengthen public confidence is to ensure that credible allegations are investigated without favour or prejudice.

Who will speak for those who feel threatened?

If members of opposition parties are being attacked or intimidated, who will guarantee their safety? Who will ensure that their complaints are heard? Who will reassure them that the law stands on their side, irrespective of the party they belong to?

And who will speak for the ordinary citizen who may not belong to the NDC, the PDF or any political party but believes that every Nigerian has the right to political freedom?

The protection of democratic rights should not depend on party membership. Today, the people affected may belong to one political group. Tomorrow, the same danger could confront another group or even citizens who have no political affiliations.

That is why this matter must transcend partisan interests.

The demand is simple: investigate credible complaints, identify those responsible where evidence permits, prosecute offenders in accordance with the law and provide effective protection against further attacks.

The public deserves regular, credible information about the steps taken by the relevant authorities. If the allegations are established, those responsible must face the consequences. If claims prove unfounded, the facts should also be made clear.

Justice requires both accountability and fairness.

 Enugu deserves answers, not silence.

So, once again, we ask: **Who is afraid of opposition in Enugu?**

Who is behind the alleged attacks on the NDC and PDF, if there are sponsors? Why are concerns about the safety of their members continuing to arise? What have the security agencies done? What more must be done to prevent political violence? And when will the people of Enugu receive clear, credible answers?

These questions should not be treated as an attempt to provoke political tension. They are an appeal to prevent tension from escalating, to protect human dignity and to preserve the peace for which the people of Enugu deserve to be known.

The answers must come through credible investigations, public accountability and decisive action within the law.

Enugu belongs to all its citizens, not only those who support the government, not only those who belong to the ruling party and not only those whose political opinions are popular.

Every citizen deserves protection. Every lawful political party deserves space to operate. Every individual deserves the freedom to express a political opinion without fear of violence.

The ballot box, not intimidation, must determine political legitimacy. Dialogue, not threats, must define political engagement. The law, not partisan loyalty, must determine who is protected and who is held accountable.

If opposition is lawful, why should its members be afraid? If attacks have occurred, who is responsible? And if the security agencies have the mandate to protect the people, what will it take to guarantee that protection?

Enugu must not wait until a preventable situation becomes a greater crisis before asking these questions.

The time for credible answers is now.

Who is afraid of opposition in Enugu? The people deserve to know.