By Dr. Amos Dada, PhD, P.Eng
Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business.” Acts 6:3
A ballot paper weighs almost nothing. The consequences of what we do with it shall weigh upon you , your family and generations to come!
As a chemical engineer, I understand that a small decision within a complex system can produce consequences far beyond its point of origin. The wrong material, an inaccurate measurement, or a disabled safety mechanism can compromise an entire plant. As a pastor, I also understand that intelligence does not eliminate greed, and public applause does not establish righteousness.
These two perspectives shape how I think about elections. Engineering asks whether a system will work. Christian ethics asks whom it will serve and whether its operation is just. A nation needs both questions answered.
“When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn.” — Proverbs 29:2
That mourning is often painfully practical: the avoidable death in an unequipped hospital, the graduate without opportunity, the farmer afraid to enter his field, and the pensioner waiting for money already earned.
How did we arrive at the ballot box?
Elections have no single, universally agreed birthday. Communities developed different ways of choosing leaders long before modern political parties and electoral commissions emerged.
Ancient Athens helped establish traditions of public participation, but its democracy differed substantially from ours. Citizens voted on public questions and elected certain officials, while many offices were filled by lot. Women, enslaved people, and resident foreigners were excluded from political participation. The Roman Republic also elected magistrates, although its voting arrangements distributed influence unequally. Our electoral inheritance therefore includes both the expansion of participation and a long struggle against exclusion.
Nigeria’s electoral development also came in stages. The 1922 Clifford Constitution introduced elected representation into the Legislative Council, with three elected seats for Lagos and one for Calabar. Participation was severely restricted by qualifications that excluded most people. The right to participate broadly in government was something later generations had to struggle to enlarge.
This history should make us careful with the franchise. A right obtained through sustained struggle deserves more thought than the excitement of a rally or the attraction of a campaign gift.
What does the Bible contribute?
The Bible does not present a modern electoral constitution. We should resist forcing contemporary party politics into every biblical account. It does, however, offer searching principles for choosing people who will exercise authority.
In Deuteronomy 1:13, Moses instructed the people to identify wise, understanding, and respected men from their tribes, whom he would appoint as leaders. Here we see community participation combined with qualifications.
In Acts 6:1–7, a complaint arose over the neglect of widows in the daily distribution. The apostles ably led by Peter asked the community to select seven men of good reputation, full of the Spirit and wisdom. The congregation participated; standards guided the selection; the apostles commissioned those chosen. Stephen and Philip stood out among the seven chosen.
Notice the seriousness of the response. A distribution failure affecting vulnerable people required trustworthy administration. Spirituality and administrative competence belonged together.
Judges 9 offers a darker account. Abimelech the illegitimate child of Gideon appealed to kinship “I am your bone and your flesh” as he sought support from the leaders of Shechem. They financed his ambition, and violence followed. He killed 70 sons of Gideon his half brothers. It leads to the classical saying by the Yorubas “ Ile to toro Omo ale ibe ni o ti dagba “ Meaning a peaceful family is evidence that the bastard child there has not yet grown up!
This was no modern democratic election, but its warning remains sharp: shared ancestry cannot establish fitness for authority. Tribalism, ethnicity, nepotism, religion are not the right parameters to choose leaders.
The question is not merely, “Is he one of us?” It is, “What will happen to all of us under his leadership?”
When electoral failure becomes national tragedy
We must distinguish between choosing an unsuitable leader, manipulating an electoral process, and destroying institutions after gaining office. These are different failures, although they can reinforce one another.
Germany provides a grave warning. Hitler was appointed chancellor in January 1933 following electoral advances by the Nazi Party and negotiations among political elites. He was not directly elected chancellor by a national majority. Once in office, the Nazis dismantled democratic restraints and persecuted their opponents. The lesson concerns voters, political gatekeepers, and institutions alike: access to office must never become permission to destroy the conditions under which public consent remains meaningful.
Kenya’s disputed December 2007 election illustrates another danger. The violence that followed killed more than 1,100 people and displaced hundreds of thousands. Electoral controversy interacted with organised violence and deeper grievances; it was not simply a case of disappointed voters becoming angry. When political competition exploits communal divisions and public institutions lose credibility, ordinary families bear the cost.
Nigeria had received an earlier, devastating warning in the Western Region. The political rupture between Chief Obafemi Awolowo and Chief Samuel Ladoke Akintola divided the Action Group and escalated into a struggle that institutions failed to contain. Differences over political strategy and alliances became a bitter contest for power. Following the disputed 1965 Western Region election, violence intensified in what became known as “Operation Wetie”—associated with dousing people and property with petrol and setting them ablaze. Political opponents became enemies to be destroyed, and ordinary citizens paid for the collapse of restraint.
Nigeria’s June 12, 1993 presidential election carries its own enduring lesson. INEC’s historical account describes the election as widely acclaimed as free and fair, yet its outcome was annulled. Citizens’ participation cannot sustain democracy if those controlling the state can set it aside.
These histories explain why the integrity of the count matters as much as the freedom to cast a vote.
When an election opens a better road
South Africa’s 1994 democratic election helped create a route from apartheid to inclusive constitutional government. After the ANC’s victory, Nelson Mandela led a Government of National Unity and made reconciliation central to his presidency. That transition did not remove every injustice or guarantee the conduct of future governments. It demonstrated that an electoral victory could be used to widen belonging and build institutions rather than pursue collective revenge.
There is a lesson here for every winner: the people who opposed you remain citizens under your care.
There is also a lesson for every supporter: a leader’s greatness must be assessed by what happens after the celebration. Can opponents speak freely? Are public resources administered fairly? Can institutions investigate wrongdoing without seeking political permission?
Good governance requires the discipline to accept limits on one’s own power.
An engineer’s questions for a political manifesto
My engineering training makes me uncomfortable with promises that have no operating explanation.
If a candidate promises reliable electricity, I want to understand generation, transmission, distribution, financing, maintenance, and the timetable. If the promise is employment, I want to know which productive sectors will expand and what infrastructure and skills they require.
A refinery cannot be operated by enthusiasm. Neither can a country. It requires will power by the government.
In engineering, we examine material balances: what enters, what leaves, what accumulates, and what is lost. Public finance deserves similar scrutiny. When expenditure promises grow, citizens should ask where the revenue will come from, what borrowing will cost, and what obligations are being transferred to their children.
We also install safeguards because even competent operators make mistakes. In government, independent courts, credible electoral bodies, legislative scrutiny, a free press, and transparent procurement perform essential protective functions.
A political arrangement that depends entirely on the goodness of one person is dangerously underprotected.
Feedback matters too. A controller receiving a false measurement cannot regulate a process reliably. A government surrounded by flattering reports and suppressed criticism faces a comparable problem: it cannot respond honestly to conditions it refuses to measure.
A pastor’s questions for the national conscience
Competence without integrity can make exploitation more efficient. Good intentions without competence can leave preventable suffering untouched. Exodus 18:21 brings the requirements together: ability, the fear of God, truthfulness, avoidance of covetousness, greed, avarice and rejection of dishonest gain.
As ministers, we must apply these standards consistently. Our access to a politician must never become the reason we excuse conduct we would condemn in someone else. We must be the Elijah for our nation put Ahab’s on their toes.,
We should also be careful with declarations that a preferred candidate is “God’s choice.” Such claims can place ordinary political judgment beyond examination and make disagreement appear to be rebellion against God. We should avoid unnecessary, prophecies coloured with our political innuendos. We are not to be partisan. We are the fathers of the nation. Our task is to inform, educate the electorate and help then ito form consciences capable of truth, justice, and discernment.
Citizens have responsibilities as well. We cannot condemn corruption while negotiating the price of our votes. We cannot demand truthful leadership while distributing fabricated allegations. Poverty makes electoral inducements a serious temptation; it should provoke compassion and reform, not contempt for the poor. But the transaction still damages public accountability.
Young people deserve opportunities to examine policy, organise peacefully, and develop leadership. Recruiting them for intimidation spends their future in the service of somebody else’s ambition.
Election season should therefore become a season of public examination. Ask for records, costs, timetables, and measurable commitments. Reject violence. Protect lawful participation. Demand transparent results and credible resolution of disputes. After the election, continue asking questions, even when your candidate wins.
My concern as an engineer is that the system should function. My concern as a pastor is that its functioning should protect human dignity. My responsibility as a citizen is to help bring those concerns into public life.
Let us choose leaders with the seriousness with which we would choose someone to operate a dangerous plant: examine their competence, investigate their integrity, and preserve the safeguards that protect everyone.
May God grant us leaders who understand the weight of public trust, institutions strong enough to uphold justice, and citizens whose consciences cannot be purchased.
When the campaigns end and the elections are over, we must still live together with the consequences. Elections should strengthen our nation and improve the lives of its people. No political victory is worth the destruction of the country we seek to govern.
May the coming general election in Nigeria bring to office people of conscience, competence, and integrity.Leaders who will transform our abundant human talents and natural resources into genuine, widely shared prosperity. May the benefits of governance reach ordinary citizens, rather than remain concentrated among an elected and appointed few.
May God grant us the wisdom to choose well, the courage to uphold truth, and the commitment to build a nation in which every citizen has the opportunity to flourish. In Jesus’ name. Amen
