“On a busy Monday morning, a room in Abuja filled with more than three hundred people who had gathered not for another ceremonial conference, but for a conversation about the very soul of Nigeria’s democracy. The occasion was the two-day Beyond the Ballot summit, titled “Safeguarding Electoral Information Integrity in the Age of AI,” supported by the European Union through the EU-SDGN III programme and jointly organised by the International Press Centre, the Centre for Media and Society, and DAI. The room brought together members of INEC, journalists, civil society campaigners, security officials, and technology innovators—an unusual and necessary mix of people who seldom occupy the same space. Chaired by former INEC chairman Prof. Atahiru Jega, the opening day wasted no time in getting to the heart of the matter. Jega issued a clear warning about the unregulated use of artificial intelligence, but his was not a voice of doom. He argued that protecting electoral information from digital manipulation and bad actors is now one of the most urgent tasks for everyone involved in Nigeria’s electoral process. Rather than running away from technology, he asked election managers to learn how to ride it. Specifically, he proposed that INEC should build and deploy official, INEC-approved chatbots—tools powered by verified data and able to speak directly to citizens. These chatbots, he explained, could help voters quickly fact-check rumours, ask questions about polling logistics, and puncture fake videos or deepfakes before they go viral. The idea captured the mood of the entire summit: technology is not the enemy, but abandoning the field to malicious users is. The opening session set a tone that was serious without being hopeless, and it became clear that this was not going to be a typical lecture-and-tea event. There was a sense of ownership and shared responsibility in the air, as if everyone in the room understood that the future of credible elections depends as much on the messages we share online as on the ballots cast in person.
Perhaps the most compelling reason for the summit came from Dr Lanre Arogundade, Executive Director of the International Press Centre, who explained why the organisers had chosen this moment and this theme. The numbers he presented told an uncomfortable story. During the 2023 general elections, the Nigeria Factcheckers’ Coalition found that 63 percent of the presidential and National Assembly claims it reviewed were completely false. False information was not just everywhere; it moved quickly, reaching a second platform in an average of eleven minutes. More than 1.2 million accounts following leading presidential candidates were judged inauthentic, suggesting a coordinated effort to create artificial noise and influence. Voter turnout dropped to 26.7 percent, the lowest since 1999. Arogundade went on to sketch a picture of the modern Nigerian media landscape. The country has roughly 148 million internet users, and a survey of 829 voters across all six geopolitical zones found that 52 percent get their political news primarily from social media. In the South-East, that figure jumps to more than 82 percent, and over four in ten people do not bother to verify what they receive before accepting or sharing it. Meanwhile, two-thirds of Nigerians—66.5 percent—said they are extremely or genuinely concerned about AI-generated political misinformation. The threat is not localised to Nigeria either. Researchers documented 189 disinformation campaigns across Africa in a single period, four times the 2022 total, and West Africa was the most targeted region with seventy-two campaigns. Organised social-media manipulation was recorded in at least eighty-one countries, and several platforms have publicly dismantled foreign-linked networks that had been reaching Nigerian audiences. Arogundade’s conclusion was blunt: awareness alone is not enough. Nigeria needs a trusted, coordinated, rights-respecting system that lets institutions anticipate threats, verify evidence, escalate incidents, communicate authoritatively, and learn from each response. He welcomed the strides already made by INEC, including the creation of an AI unit and the reassurance that algorithms will not decide the 2027 vote. But he also insisted that the people, systems, and safeguards behind these initiatives need to be fully ready before the next campaign season begins.
The sense of urgency was reinforced by Gautier Mignot, the European Union Ambassador to Nigeria and ECOWAS, who spoke directly about the risks facing the 2027 general elections. Mignot warned that artificial intelligence and foreign information manipulation could do severe damage, even without a single ballot being changed. With disarming clarity, he explained that an election can be undermined from afar: malicious actors attack information, but their deeper purpose is to destroy public confidence. His words were a reminder that election rigging no longer only happens at polling stations; it can happen in the feeds people scroll through every day. Following him, the Chairman of INEC offered a more hopeful but equally practical view. He declared that the commission is not afraid of technology and is actively preparing for 2027 with resilience and transparency at the core. He outlined several areas of focus. The first was voter education with a difference: moving beyond the old “how to vote” messages to “how to verify.” This means teaching citizens to distinguish official INEC communications from AI-generated deepfakes and making them aware of genuine platforms and apps they can use to check suspicious content quickly. The INEC chairman also embraced what digital communication expert Aminu Kajuru calls “pre-bunking.” Instead of waiting for false information to go viral, institutions must educate citizens in advance about common manipulation tactics, giving them simple verification tools. In practical terms, that includes short audio messages in local languages and Pidgin English, delivered through WhatsApp, to help people identify fabricated information before they fall for it. On the technical side, he said INEC is strengthening its digital infrastructure to withstand foreign information manipulation and interference, investing in systems and vendors, and building internal mechanisms to debunk viral misinformation within minutes of it appearing. He also stressed the importance of partnerships with global platforms such as TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, YouTube, Messenger, Telegram, and X, noting that INEC already has a memorandum of understanding with TikTok. The message from both speakers was consistent: the threat is real, but the response must be proactive, collaborative, and firmly rooted in citizen trust.
The keynote address by Prof. Abigael Ogwezzy-Ndisika of the University of Lagos made plain that the dangers are not hypothetical. Building on past experiences—like cloned statements and fake result sheets during the 2023 elections—she warned that 2027 could face even more sophisticated threats. Among the key vectors she identified were highly realistic deepfakes, persistent information manipulation, and foreign interference carried out through local influencers who may not even know they are being used. Her proposed answer was an Electoral Information Integrity Response Protocol, a structured system that would include early-warning mechanisms, forensic verification of suspicious content, and rapid communication channels to reach the public with accurate information. Importantly, she also cautioned against overreaching responses, such as shutting down the internet, which can do more harm than good and end up silencing legitimate voices while failing to stop determined manipulators. Other sessions on the opening day deepened the conversation and brought different perspectives to the table. There was an evidence briefing by Dr. Monday Ashibogwu and Prof. Lambe Mustafa, which offered a research-backed look at how disinformation spreads and where the gaps in Nigeria’s defences still sit. A later fireside conversation on understanding foreign information manipulation and interference in both Nigerian and international contexts was moderated by Prof. Umaru Pate, with panellists Kunle Adebajo of the Academy of Open Source Investigations and Elonal Hickok of the Global Network Initiative. They looked at real cases, shared lessons from other countries, and wrestled with the difficulty of designing countermeasures that are both effective and respectful of citizens’ rights. One of the most interesting sessions of the day was titled “Votes, Voices, and Algorithms: Who Is Most Exposed?” Moderated by Ms. Maupe Ogun-Yusuf, it featured Mr. Dayo Oketola, Chief Press Secretary to the INEC Chairman; Mr. Ade Atobatele, founder of Bootstrap Africa; and Dr. Toyosi Akerele-Ogunsiji, founder of Rise Network. The panel examined the way algorithms amplify sensational content, why the most vulnerable users are often those with the least access to reliable information, and what it means for different groups of voters to be exposed to different versions of reality online. The discussion felt especially relevant to the wider summit theme because it moved beyond institutional concerns to the everyday experience of Nigerian citizens navigating a polluted information environment.
Across all these sessions, one theme kept returning: the greatest casualty of information warfare is trust. The speakers understood that democratic elections do not just need to be credible; they need to be seen as credible by ordinary Nigerians who are bombarded with falsehoods every day. This is why the emphasis on pre-bunking felt so important. Instead of waiting for viral lies to force exhausting, reactive fact-checking, the goal is to arm people in advance with the questions they should ask themselves before sharing anything. It is the difference between treating citizens as passive recipients of official messages and treating them as active defenders of their own information space. There is also a deeply human dimension to the use of local languages and Pidgin English. When election officials explain verification methods through a short voice note on WhatsApp, they are meeting people where they already live and talk. They are acknowledging that literacy does not mean only schoolbook literacy, but also the ability to feel confident in front of a glowing screen. The summit’s organisers have been careful not to frame AI as a monster hiding under the bed. Instead, they present it as a tool like any other: capable of great harm when mishandled and great good when guided by clear rules. That nuance is what separates this conversation from the panic that often surrounds new technology. At the same time, there was no attempt to sugarcoat the scale of the problem. The statistics are staggering, and the speed at which false claims leap across WhatsApp, TikTok, and X is truly alarming. But the answer, according to the voices gathered in Abuja, is neither censorship nor shutdowns. It is literacy, transparency, coordination, and an unwavering commitment to human rights. Perhaps the most reassuring outcome of Day One was seeing institutions admit their own vulnerabilities out loud. INEC did not arrive at the summit with a triumphant report; it arrived with plans, questions, and a list of improvements it still needs to make. That willingness to learn is itself a form of credibility. The task now is to ensure that the same honesty carries over into the public space, where people can see the work being done and hold their leaders accountable for the integrity of the information ecosystem. The summit, in that sense, is not just for the officials and experts in the room. It is for every Nigerian voter who deserves to make choices based on truth, not on manipulated pixels and orchestrated rumours.
By the end of the opening day, it was clear that the summit had already achieved something valuable: it had placed the issue of electoral information integrity, and AI’s role in it, firmly on the table, not as a niche concern for technologists but as a central democratic challenge. The conversations were candid, sometimes uncomfortable, and all the more productive for that. There was no denial of the fact that foreign forces, local actors, and algorithm-driven platforms are all capable of distorting Nigeria’s electoral reality. There was, however, a growing conviction that these forces can be countered with the right combination of technology, education, and public trust. The summit was designed as a space where institutions like INEC could listen to independent experts and journalists, and where media and civil society could push the electoral commission to keep raising its standards. That kind of honest interface is rare and precious. It is also exactly what will be needed in the months leading up to the 2027 elections. As Day One drew to a close, the remaining sessions and a final communique were still to come, with recommendations and next steps for action. But the opening day had already delivered a clear message: Nigeria has the institutions, the talent, and the civic energy to protect its electoral process, provided everyone shares the responsibility. The summit showed that the fight against disinformation is not a sprint but a long, patient, collective effort. It will require vigilance from election officials, creativity from communicators, courage from journalists, accountability from platforms, and curiosity from citizens. It will require the kind of conversations that happened in that room to spread across the country, into the markets, living rooms, and group chats where Nigerian voters actually make sense of their choices. That is not just the challenge of the 2027 election; it is the ongoing work of democracy itself, and it must continue long after the final communique is read.”