The passage of the Electoral Act 2026 has sparked intense debate across Nigeria’s political landscape, particularly among opposition parties that fear the new legal framework may tilt the playing field in favour of dominant political forces.
While the government and supporters of the legislation argue that the new provisions are designed to strengthen the electoral system and promote transparency, many opposition actors contend that certain clauses could significantly weaken their ability to compete effectively in future elections, especially the 2027 general polls.
These include the removal of indirect primaries for candidate selection, significant increase in the presidential campaign spending limit, absence of explicit provisions for real-time electronic results transmission, removal of certificate forgery as a ground for election petitions, and the requirement for political parties to submit digital membership registers to the electoral commission.
Together, these provisions have created apprehension among opposition parties, many of which already struggle with limited financial resources, weak institutional structures, and internal divisions.
Direct primaries
Section 84(2) of the new law provides that political parties shall nominate candidates for elective offices either through direct primaries or by consensus.
This provision effectively abolishes the delegate system (indirect primary) previously used by most political parties, where a limited number of delegates voted at party congresses and conventions. The delegate process had often been criticised for encouraging vote-buying, with aspirants offering cash or other inducements to influence the outcome.
Under the new arrangement, candidates are expected to emerge either through direct voting by registered party members or through a consensus process agreed upon by party stakeholders.
BusinessDay reports that direct primaries involve allowing all registered members of a party to participate in the nomination process rather than limiting the exercise to delegates.
However, opposition parties argue that the cost implications of nationwide direct primaries are enormous, as conducting primaries across thousands of wards requires extensive logistics, personnel, and security arrangements.
For parties with limited financial capacity, the cost of organising such exercises may be prohibitive. As a result, many opposition parties are likely to resort to consensus arrangements in order to avoid the financial burden associated with direct primaries.
While consensus candidate selection is allowed within the law, critics argue that it can undermine internal democracy and fuel internal disputes. When party leaders decide candidates behind closed doors in the name of consensus, aggrieved aspirants may defect to other parties or challenge the process in court.
Analysts argue that this provision may deepen political instability within opposition parties already grappling with factional struggles.
Read also: How Electoral Act could shape or shake 2027 election
N10bn presidential campaign spending limit
Another provision raising concern is the increase in the campaign spending limit for presidential elections to N10 billion. Proponents have argued that campaign costs have risen significantly over the years and that the new ceiling simply reflects present political realities.
BusinessDay reports that the new Act reviewed upward the election spending limit under Section 92(1-8), raising the spending threshold for presidential poll from N5 billion to N10 billion.
Nigeria’s presidential elections involve nationwide campaigns across 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory, making them one of the most expensive electoral contests in Africa.
Nevertheless, opposition parties view the new spending limit as a move that indirectly favours the ruling party and other well-funded political actors.
Although the spending limit represents a maximum allowable expenditure rather than a mandatory requirement, political analysts argue that campaign competitiveness often correlates with financial strength.
Observers argue that political parties that cannot fund nationwide advertising, grassroots mobilisation, logistics, and election monitoring may find it difficult to compete effectively with financially stronger rivals.
Absence of real-time results transmission
Opposition parties have raised concerns that without guaranteed real-time electronic transmission of election results, the continued reliance on manual collation processes could create vulnerabilities within the electoral system.
BusinessDay reports that Section 60(3) of the new Electoral Act does not expressly mandate real-time transmission of election results, but instead provides for both manual and electronic transmission.
The section states that: “The Presiding Officer shall electronically transmit the results from each polling unit to the IReV portal, and such transmission shall be done after the prescribed Form EC8A has been signed and stamped by the Presiding Officer and/or countersigned by the candidates or polling agents where available at the polling unit.”
It further provides that where electronic transmission fails due to communication challenges, and it becomes impossible to upload the results contained in Form EC8A, the manually completed and signed Form EC8A shall serve as the primary basis for collation and declaration of results.
In effect, while the Act recognises electronic transmission to the IReV portal, it also retains the manually completed Form EC8A as the legally binding document in situations where electronic transmission cannot be carried out.
Manual transmission of results from polling units to ward, local government, and state collation centres has historically been one of the most controversial aspects of Nigerian elections, with allegations of tampering, result alteration, and intimidation frequently emerging during the collation process.
While electoral authorities maintain that manual and electronic processes can coexist within a hybrid system, opposition parties argue that any ambiguity in the law regarding real-time electronic transmission may undermine public confidence in the electoral process.
Removal of certificate forgery as ground for election petition
One of the most controversial changes in the new law is the removal of certificate forgery as a specific ground for challenging election results through petitions.
Historically, Nigerian courts have entertained election petitions where candidates were alleged to have submitted forged academic credentials or falsified qualifications.
BusinessDay reports that Section 138 of the Electoral Act 2026 outlines the grounds upon which an election may be challenged, but no longer includes certificate forgery.
Section 138(1) of the Act states that an election may only be questioned on the grounds that the election was invalid due to corrupt practices or non-compliance with the provisions of the Act, or that the respondent was not duly elected by a majority of lawful votes cast.
Under the revised framework, opposition parties worry that the removal of this provision could weaken legal mechanisms for holding candidates accountable for falsified documentation. Critics argue that academic and professional qualifications remain an important aspect of public trust and political integrity.
Submission of digital registers
Another significant concern relates to the requirement that political parties must submit comprehensive digital registers of their members to the electoral commission within a specified timeline.
Under the revised election timetable released by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), political parties are required to submit comprehensive digital membership registers by April 2, 2026.
If parties fail to meet the digital registration deadline, they risk sanctions that could potentially affect their eligibility to participate in elections.
This new provision has heightened fears that several smaller political parties may effectively be shut out of the 2027 elections due to non-compliance, following limited resources to conduct nationwide electronic registration of members.
Taken together, these provisions have deepened anxiety within opposition circles about the future competitiveness of Nigeria’s multiparty system. Political analysts warn that when electoral rules inadvertently favour dominant parties, democratic competition may gradually weaken.
Opposition voices
Peter Obi, the 2023 presidential candidate of the Labour Party (LP), has vowed to challenge the newly enacted Electoral Act 2026 in court, describing some of its provisions as attempts to manipulate the 2027 general elections.
Obi spoke at the weekend in his hometown of Agulu in Anaocha Local Government Area, warning that aspects of the new law could undermine the credibility of the country’s electoral process if left unchallenged.
Similarly, Ahmed Ajuji, the National Chairman of the New Nigeria People’s Party (NNPP), told newsmen in Abuja that the opposition considered several provisions of the Electoral Act as an attempt to subvert the will of the people in the 2027 general elections and install a one-party state.
He said the implementation of the new Act will undermine electoral transparency and the sanctity of the ballot, both of which are fundamental to free, fair and credible elections and the bedrock of participatory democracy.
Also the Inter-Party Advisory Council (IPAC) has warned that political parties across the country may boycott the 2027 general elections if contentious provisions in the newly enacted Electoral Act 2026 are not urgently amended.
Speaking to newsmen after an emergency meeting with leaders and representatives of political parties in Abuja, IPAC National Chairman, Yusuf Dantalle, said the council had resolved to mobilise political parties nationwide to resist the contentious provisions if the National Assembly fails to address them.
