The 2027 Elections And Artificial Intelligence

Nigeria is already talking about the 2027 elections. Politicians are preparing for the race, people who want to run for office are meeting with others, political parties are making plans, and opposition leaders are discussing how to challenge the party in power. People are talking about how political positions should be shared among regions, politicians changing parties, public support for candidates, and political partnerships. But they should also be helping Nigerians prepare to make informed choices about their future.

However, another force is entering the election process. It does not need to belong to a political party, attend rallies, or stand in line at a polling station. That force is artificial intelligence (AI).

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has announced plans to use AI tools before the 2027 general elections. INEC chairman Professor Joash Amupitan said the technology will help with work behind the scenes, find differences or errors in records, and protect the commission's systems from digital attacks. He made his position clear: “algorithms will not, and must never, decide the 2027 vote.”

This is good news. But who will protect Nigerians from politicians, campaign workers, and online influencers who might use the same technology to shape how voters think, feel, and eventually vote?

Every serious candidate should explain how they plan to make Nigerians safer, create jobs, improve public services, fight corruption, and give women more chances to take part in political leadership. Voters deserve clear policies, trustworthy promises, and goals that can be measured. They deserve more than slogans, public endorsements, and claims that only one candidate can save the country.

But even a strong election plan can be weakened if voters are tricked into supporting one candidate or rejecting another because of false information. This is why AI is an election issue, not just a technology story.

 

When Campaigns Find a Digital Voice

Nigeria does not need to imagine this problem. There are already warning signs. Fake newspaper front pages have been shared online with false quotes wrongly linked to well-known political figures. A false claim that INEC had changed its 2027 election schedule also spread online before it was shown to be untrue. An old video can be presented as proof that a politician has recently betrayed someone. A photograph can be changed to make it look as if someone supports a candidate when that support never happened.

Now imagine what could happen next. A copied version of a person's voice announces that a presidential candidate has dropped out of the race. A fake INEC statement says voting has been delayed in certain local government areas. A made-up video shows a candidate insulting a religious group. A false election result sheet appears online while votes are still being counted. By the time people discover the truth, screenshots may already have spread through WhatsApp groups, radio discussions, and political networks across the country.

In Nigeria, political competition is closely connected to ethnic, religious, and regional identities. False content like this could increase tensions or lead to violence. Campaigns could also send different groups targeted messages that tell conflicting stories, leaving citizens without a shared set of facts to use when judging candidates.

Women candidates face an especially cruel form of this threat. AI-made sexual images, fake intimate content, and false identities can be used to shame and frighten women and push them out of public life. The goal may not be to win a political argument. It may be to make taking part in politics so painful that women feel they have no choice but to leave.

During the 2027 election, a lie could reach millions of people before the truth has a chance to catch up. The danger is not limited to convincing fake videos and recordings. Repeating a false claim can make people believe it is true. Even a real video can cause serious harm if it is shown without important details or context. AI simply makes it cheaper and faster to create, change, and spread misleading content.

 

Protecting the Vote Without Controlling Opinions

INEC's plan to use AI in its own work is important, but it cannot protect all the information people will see during an election. Keeping a database safe will not stop a fake video from spreading quickly online. Finding errors in election records is not the same as spotting a fake speech shared across millions of phones.

Who will check suspicious content? Who can correct a false claim quickly enough to stop it from causing harm? How can someone who has been falsely shown or described get justice? And will the same rules apply when false information comes from a powerful government official, an opposition campaign, or a popular online supporter? These questions need answers before election campaigns become more intense.

INEC should publish clear rules explaining how it will respond to fake announcements, changed election materials, and people pretending to be its officials. Its AI tools must be checked by humans and used through clear, open procedures, with protections against mistakes. Citizens should understand what the technology can and cannot do, and how they can challenge decisions made with its help.

But there is another danger: people could use the fight against false information as an excuse to silence criticism.

A government that calls unwanted news “fake news” may try to silence people who oppose it. A politician caught making a damaging statement may simply claim that AI created the recording. As fake audio and video become harder to spot, people may also wrongly dismiss real evidence as fake. In other words, technology can make it easier to create lies and to avoid being held responsible when the truth comes out.

The answer to online deception must not be giving up democratic freedoms.

The rules must separate clearly false and harmful content from jokes, criticism, and fair political disagreement. The rules should be open, fair, and applied in a balanced way. Independent bodies should be able to review decisions, and people should have a way to appeal them. No institution should have unlimited power to decide which political views Nigerians are allowed to hear.

Political parties must also take responsibility for the people and tools they use in their campaigns. They should reject fake content, explain when they make significant use of AI in campaign messages, and take action against supporters who knowingly spread lies. Technology platforms should respond quickly to trustworthy reports of organised attempts to mislead people. Media organisations should check disputed audio, video, and images before sharing them widely. Fact-checkers and civil society groups also need the tools and public reach to challenge false claims.

Citizens must also avoid becoming unpaid spreaders of political propaganda. Before forwarding a shocking voice message to a family group, ask who made it. Before sharing a dramatic video, check whether it is recent and genuine. Before believing a screenshot of a headline, look for the original news report.

 

From Election Technology to Democratic Accountability

In the end, the 2027 election will test more than INEC's ability to use technology. It will also test whether political parties act honestly, whether public institutions remain independent, whether digital platforms behave responsibly, and whether voters make careful decisions.

Nigerians should ask candidates not only what they plan to do about the economy, security, and public services, but also how they will protect people's rights online, control the use of AI, and prevent abuse made possible by technology. Candidates should be judged by clear promises they can be held to, not by campaign shows and speeches.

INEC is right to say that algorithms must never decide the vote. But protecting the election is not the commission's job alone. Technology companies must act responsibly. Political leaders must refuse to use lies as weapons. The media must check facts before spreading information. Citizens must question what they see before sharing it.

AI can help protect election systems. It cannot create honesty, rebuild public trust, or replace leaders who answer for their actions. Technology also cannot save a democracy if voters are too tired, angry, or distrustful to demand better from their leaders.

The real fight in 2027 will not be between people and machines. It will be between a democracy that gives citizens reliable facts and a political culture that is willing to mislead them to gain power.

The question is not just who will win in 2027. It is whether Nigerians will be free to make their own choices.