The Osun State Government, on Thursday, approached the court for an order of mandamus to compel the investigation of Senator Francis Fadahunsi over alleged threats against supporters of the Accord Party ahead of Saturday’s governorship election.

The application marked HOS/M.157/26, which was filed by the Attorney General of Osun State, has the Inspector-General of Police and the Commissioner of Police, Osun State Command, as Respondents.

The Applicant told the court that the legal action followed a video circulating on social media in which the lawmaker representing Osun East Senatorial District, Fadahunsi, was allegedly captured while addressing a political gathering in front of the Owa Obokun’s Palace in Ilesha on August 11.

The lawmaker was alleged to have made statements interpreted as calls for violence against members of the Accord Party and supporters of the incumbent governor, Ademola Adeleke.

The court was told that a transcript and translation of the speech showed Fadahunsi allegedly directing supporters to attack Accord members wherever they encountered them and also made threats against their families.

The lawmaker was alleged to have instructed his supporters to chase Accord members out of hotels where they were found and made derogatory comments about the party’s yellow caps.

The Attorney-General is among other things, asking the court to compel the police to investigate the video and determine whether the alleged statements constitute criminal offences under applicable laws.

He is also seeking an order directing the police to preserve, authenticate and conduct a forensic examination of the complete video to establish whether it has been altered or edited.

Other reliefs sought include compelling the police to take preventive measures to protect Accord candidates, members and voters from intimidation or harassment before, during and after the election.

“An order directing the Respondents, jointly and severally, to ensure that no person or group acting upon the alleged statements/publication is permitted to intimidate, threaten, attack, harass, chase from hotels, er unlawfully prevent Accord Party members, supporters, or any registered voter from freely exercising their constitutional and statutory richts before, during, and after the forthcomino Osun State Governorship Election scheduled for 15 August 2026.”

As well as, “An order directing the Respondents, jointly and severally, to submit a comprehensive report of all steps taken in compliance with the orders of this Honourable Court within forty-eight (48) hours of the grant of these orders or within such other time as this Honourable Court may deem fit to prescribe, having regard to the extreme urgency and public safety implications of the matter.”

In the supporting affidavit, Nurudeen Kareem, Special Adviser to Governor Ademola Adeleke on Legal Matters, said Accord members had expressed “reasonable and legitimate concerns regarding their safety and security before, during, and after the forthcoming election.”

The government argued that the police have a statutory responsibility under the Police Act 2020 and the 1999 Constitution to prevent crime and maintain public order.

It maintained that waiting until violence occurs before investigating an alleged public threat would undermine the preventive role of law enforcement.

“The Applicant believes that waiting until actual violence, deaths, or injuries occur before investigating an alleged public instruction to kill political opponents would amount to a dereliction of duty,” the government said.

The Attorney-General also clarified that the suit was not asking the court to determine Fadahunsi’s criminal guilt, stressing that such a determination would require a proper criminal trial.

Rather, the government said it was seeking to compel the police to carry out their statutory responsibilities and take appropriate preventive action.

With the election scheduled for Saturday, the government said “time is of the absolute essence”, warning that failure to act on the alleged threats could expose residents to “irreparable harm, loss of life, and widespread civil unrest.”

Every election season in Nigeria brings with it familiar controversies: vote-buying, godfatherism, and the endless battles over electoral credibility. Yet beneath these headline-grabbing issues lies a quieter scandal that rarely receives the same attention but is no less corrosive to Nigeria’s democratic fabric. It is the curious case of civil servants who resign to contest elections, only to return to their government jobs after losing.This practice, subtle yet pervasive, undermines the neutrality of the civil service and turns resignation into a bureaucratic charade. It is a loophole that allows ambition to be tested without risk, creating a revolving door between politics and public service that ordinary Nigerians cannot access.The cycle is predictable. A civil servant employed in a ministry, agency, or legislative office catches the political bug. A seat in the Senate, the House of Representatives, or a state assembly beckons. By law, they must resign before contesting. Dutifully, they submit a resignation letter, step away from their desk, and launch into campaigning. Posters go up, rallies are held, promises are made. But when the ballots are counted and defeat arrives, many simply retrace their steps to their former offices. They request that their resignation be withdrawn or treated as if it never took effect. In many cases, the request is granted. Salaries resume, desks are reoccupied, and the civil service absorbs them back as though nothing happened.This revolving-door arrangement turns the civil service into a cushion for political risk. Ordinary Nigerians who gamble on politics without government jobs face real consequences: financial strain, career disruption, and uncertainty. Civil servants, by contrast, enjoy the comfort of knowing that their jobs await them if politics fails.Consider the case of Gospel Daniel Musa, a staff member of Nigeria’s National Assembly. In 2019, Musa resigned to contest for a Senate seat. He complied with the law, stepped away from his position, and entered the race. When the results came in and he was not declared winner, Musa did not remain outside the civil service to pursue other opportunities. Instead, he returned to the National Assembly and resumed his duties, continuing his career as though the political interlude had been a brief sabbatical. Musa’s case is emblematic of a broader culture in which resignation letters are treated as temporary paperwork rather than final acts.Nigeria’s legal framework is unambiguous. The Constitution and the Electoral Act require civil servants to resign, withdraw, or retire from public service before contesting elections. The requirement is not symbolic. It exists to preserve neutrality and prevent officers from using government resources to advance personal campaigns. Section 88(1) of the Electoral Act 2026 restates this principle, echoing earlier provisions such as Section 84(12) of the 2022 Act. State governments, including Kano, have issued circulars reminding civil servants of this obligation ahead of the 2027 elections. Courts have also clarified the distinction between civil servants and political appointees. Ministers and advisers, appointed at the pleasure of the president or governors, are not bound by the same resignation requirement. But career civil servants—those recruited, promoted, and pensionable within the system—must resign before contesting. A National Assembly staff member, like Musa, falls squarely into this category.The problem lies not in the clarity of the law but in its enforcement. In practice, resignation letters are often treated as reversible. If not fully processed, or if informal understandings exist with superiors, defeated aspirants can slip back into their roles. This undermines the spirit of the law. A resignation intended to be temporary is not a resignation at all—it is a calculated maneuver to safeguard one’s job while testing political waters. The civil service rules, in many documented cases, do not treat resignation to contest elections as irrevocable. Where a resignation has not been formally accepted and processed to finality, officers can return. This creates a culture of “resignation charades,” where compliance is performed but not enforced.The consequences are serious. The resignation requirement becomes a hollow ritual, undermining trust in the neutrality of the civil service. Civil servants enjoy the comfort of a guaranteed job if politics fails, while ordinary Nigerians face real consequences. Officers can leverage official networks and resources during campaigns, blurring the line between public duty and personal ambition. This revolving-door arrangement creates a two-tier system: one for career civil servants with safety nets, and another for ordinary citizens who risk everything to contest elections.Nigeria is not alone in grappling with this issue. In many democracies, civil servants are required to resign permanently before contesting elections. In the United States, the Hatch Act restricts federal employees from engaging in partisan political activity while employed. In India, civil servants must resign or retire before entering politics, with no option of reinstatement. In Ghana, similar rules exist to ensure neutrality, and resignation is treated as final. Nigeria’s practice of reversible resignation stands out as a loophole that undermines democratic safeguards.Several factors explain why this practice endures. Administrative bodies often fail to treat resignations as final. Officers and superiors sometimes collude to keep the door open for reinstatement. The public and political class often treat the practice as a harmless quirk rather than a serious breach. Reform requires political will, which is often lacking.Reforming this practice requires more than restating the law. It demands administrative and cultural change. Resignations submitted for political contests must be treated as irrevocable. Bodies like the Head of Service and the National Assembly Service Commission must close loopholes that allow reinstatement. The public and political class must stop treating reversible resignation as harmless and recognize it as a subversion of democratic safeguards. Clear records of resignations and reinstatements should be maintained and made public.Nigeria’s civil service is meant to be a neutral institution, serving whichever government the people elect. But when officers resign to contest elections and return after losing, neutrality is compromised. The practice erodes credibility, creates unfair advantages, and undermines democratic safeguards. Reform is possible. By treating resignations as final, enforcing administrative rules, and shifting cultural attitudes, Nigeria can strengthen the integrity of its civil service. The revolving door must be closed if the civil service is to remain a true guardian of neutrality in Nigeria’s democracy.

Yiaga Africa has expressed concern over the rising incidents of pre-election violence ahead of the August 15 governorship election in Osun State.

The Executive Director of the organisation, Samson Itodo, raised the concern during an interview on Arise Television on Friday, describing the situation as a serious threat to the credibility and peaceful conduct of the election.

Itodo called for stronger security measures to protect voters, political parties, electoral officials and other stakeholders before, during and after the election.

He stressed the need for security agencies to remain professional, impartial and proactive in preventing violence and maintaining law and order across the state.

The concerns come amid heightened political activities as the major parties intensify their campaigns ahead of the August 15 governorship poll.

Yiaga Africa urged relevant authorities to take decisive steps to address emerging security threats and create a safe environment for residents to exercise their constitutional right to vote.