Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, has rejected allegations that he manipulated the 2023 presidential election in the South-South to favour President Bola Tinubu over Labour Party candidate, Peter Obi.

Wike made the clarification in Abuja on Wednesday, describing the allegation as a narrative largely driven by social media.

The minister had earlier disclosed that the G5, a group of five Peoples Democratic Party governors opposed to the party’s presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, adopted a strategy that allowed Obi to win in some South-South states during the 2023 election.

He explained that the strategy was designed to prevent Atiku from benefiting from the PDP’s traditional strength in the region, adding that Rivers State was handled differently because of its political significance.

Responding to allegations that he personally altered election results in favour of Tinubu, Wike questioned how one individual could manipulate results across thousands of polling units.

He also argued that social media discussions should not be treated as a substitute for verified election results, noting that Nigeria had about 176,000 polling units during the 2023 election.

Wike further questioned whether the allegations of electoral manipulation were supported by evidence during the legal challenges that followed the election.

Explaining the G5’s strategy, the FCT minister said the group considered Atiku a greater political threat in the South-South because of the region’s traditional support for the PDP.

According to him, the strategy involved encouraging votes for Obi in some areas in order to reduce the number of votes that could go to Atiku.

Wike said the approach was used in states such as Edo and Cross River, where the group believed Obi’s performance could reduce Atiku’s advantage.

He, however, said the strategy was not extended to Rivers State because of the political implications he associated with Obi winning the state.

Wike maintained that political strategy should not be interpreted as electoral rigging, arguing that manipulating an election would be difficult in areas where a political party lacked genuine grassroots support.

He urged political commentators and members of the public to focus on verified electoral records and processes rather than conclusions drawn from social media discussions.