INEC And Electoral Reform Under Scrutiny

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, on February 18, 2026, signed the Electoral Bill 2026 into law, preparing the ground for the 2027 general elections in less than one year. There are six major amendments to the old Electoral Act 2022, carried out in reaction to demands by political parties and civil society organisations. With the kind of euphoria that has greeted the amendments, especially the inclusion of ‘real-time’ electronic transmission of votes, the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Joash Ojo Amupitan, SAN, has no excuse for not delivering credible polls in 2027.

The amendments include the electronic transmission of polling unit results (Form EC8A) to the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV), which is now mandatory. However, a controversial “fallback clause” allows physical result sheets to serve as the primary source for collation if technical or network failure occurs. In Kenya, for instance, fallback options for bypassing electronic transmission of election results are generally not acceptable because the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) conducts rigorous pre-election testing of its technology weeks before voting. This ensures that the systems are reliable and minimises excuses for reverting to manual methods. We encourage INEC to adopt this approach instead of utilising the fallback option.

Second is the abolition of indirect primaries. Political parties are no longer permitted to use the delegate system for selecting candidates. Nominations can only be done through direct primaries, where all members of a political party vote for the candidates of their choice, or through consensus by acceptable means. The new law also requires that membership registers of political parties be maintained digitally. Political parties must submit such a verified digital register of all members to INEC at least 21 days before parties conduct their primary elections. Parties must maintain digital, NIN-linked membership registers. This is a step toward reducing factional manipulation. Only those whose names are found on the register can vote or contest, effectively curbing last-minute party switching.

SPONSOR AD

Another clause in the newly signed Electoral Act 2026 prohibits vote buying and imposes stricter penalties for it. It now carries a fine of at least N5 million for anyone caught engaging in it, up to two years’ imprisonment, and a 10-year ban from contesting any election. The effectiveness of this clause depends largely on security agencies, which must play their roles without bias or sympathy for any political party or candidates in an election. There is also a clause that emphasises INEC’s financial independence, as a dedicated INEC Fund has been established under the new amendment to the Act. The federal government must release funds to the Commission at least six months before the polls (down from the 12 months previously required).

Furthermore, the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) is now statutorily mandated for all accreditation. This elevates BVAS from a mere administrative innovation to a legal requirement for all voter accreditation. This means INEC is now legally bound to use BVAS in every election, ensuring that only properly accredited voters can cast ballots. Also, INEC has made downloading the Permanent Voter Card easier from its website.

The new election campaign spending limit has effectively monetised the process, with the tendency to edge out candidates without deep pockets. Between the Electoral Act 2010 and the Electoral Act 2026, the spending limit has been widened by about 400 per cent. In the 2010 Electoral Act, the limits were as follows: presidential candidates capped at N1 billion, governorship at N200 million, Senate at N40 million, and House of Reps at N20 million. Under the Electoral Act 2022, the limits were N5 billion for presidential candidates, N1 billion for governorship, N100 million for Senate, and N70 million for House of Reps. However, in the new Electoral Act 2026, the spending limit has ballooned to: presidential candidates (N20 billion), governorship (N5 billion), Senate (N500 million), and House of Reps (N200 million). As some Civil Society Organisations have remarked, this risks enabling “elite capture” of the electoral process, as it may favour only well-funded candidates over candidates who merely have grassroots support.

Furthermore, under Section 83 of the new Act, courts are barred from hearing internal party disputes. Complainants or lawyers who file such suits risk a N10 million penalty. This may be a measure to ensure that time is not wasted in pre-election matters. However, Section 138 of the Act has removed certificate forgery as a ground for election petitions, meaning candidates can no longer be challenged in court on the basis of presenting forged academic qualifications. In the 2010 and 2022 Electoral Acts, certificate forgery was explicitly recognised as a ground for disqualification and election petitions. This is a setback in a society where certificate forgery has become a perennial problem.

The amendments to the Electoral Act are designed to ensure that the country conducts free, fair, and credible elections in 2027. However, elections in Nigeria are ultimately shaped not just by the written provisions of the law but by the actions and inactions of INEC, political parties, politicians themselves, and security agencies. While the Electoral Act provides the framework, its effectiveness depends on whether these actors uphold its principles in practice. If INEC enforces transparency, if parties respect internal democracy, and if politicians commit to fair play, then the country’s elections can be credible. Conversely, when these actors disregard the tenets of the law, even the best legal framework cannot guarantee free and fair outcomes.