Media reports to the effect that the ActionAid Nigeria (AAN) has condemned the federal government’s decision to allocate N135.22 billion for post-election litigation ahead of the 2027 general elections is not unexpected.
As a matter of fact, the electoral umpire, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), has had cause to decry the burden of the plethora of litigation, including funds and off-cycle elections, arising from election disputes by political parties and their candidates.
AAN, which described the budget as a troubling indication that Nigeria’s electoral process is “being designed to fail,” said in a press statement recently in Abuja, that the proposed allocation is a sharp and unjustifiable increase compared to previous election cycles.
It noted that INEC had allocated about N2.104 billion for litigation and prosecution in 2022, and N3.087 billion in 2023 to handle post-election cases.
According to organisation, the sudden jump to N135 billion is unprecedented and raises serious concerns about priorities, planning, and accountability within Nigeria’s electoral system.
The group warned that instead of addressing the root causes of electoral disputes, the government appears to be normalising them through public spending.
It added that such a large litigation budget would make elections more expensive, overburden the judiciary, slow down legal processes, and increase costs for the government, political parties, and citizens.
The Country Director of ActionAid Nigeria, Andrew Mamedu, criticised the approach, describing it as reactive rather than preventive. Mamedu highlighted gaps in the Electoral Act 2022, particularly the lack of clarity around the electronic transmission of results, which contributed to disputes during the 2023 general elections.
He noted that efforts to address these issues during the Electoral Act 2026 review process were unsuccessful. The country director explained that civil society organisations had recommended mandatory, real-time electronic transmission of results to reduce human interference, curb manipulation, and build public trust in the electoral process.
According to him, failure to adopt these reforms has led to continued ambiguity, which fuels electoral disputes. AAN also expressed concern that allocating such a significant amount to litigation reflects a governance approach that allows preventable problems to occur, only to be managed later at great public expense.
The organisation added that the N135 billion provision represents a misplacement of national priorities, especially as Nigerians continue to face challenges in healthcare, education, insecurity, and access to basic services.
ActionAid Nigeria, therefore, called on the president to decline assent to the proposed budget and to review the allocation. While recognising that some funding for post-election litigation is necessary, the group described the proposed amount as excessive and disproportionate.
It urged the government to redirect excess funds to critical sectors such as education, healthcare, and strengthen the electoral system to prevent disputes, rather than spending heavily on resolving them after elections.
It is instructive that the immediate-past Chairman of INEC, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, had during a review of the 2023 elections lamented the huge cost incurred by the commission in defending election litigation.
The then INEC chief who refused to mention the amount expended by the commission in defending appeals that arose from the 2023 general elections, told candidates and political parties to embrace alternative dispute resolution mechanisms to sort out their differences.
According to him, the conversation shouldn’t be about whether the ballot box or courtroom should be the final determinant of elections, adding that both the ballot and courts are parts of the election process.
He said, “This conversation started in 2011. There are questions whether the commission should defend the elections it conducted or not. There is also an argument that what the commission should only do is to provide evidence but not to defend its activities on election day. As far as the legal framework is concerned, we are joined in petitions and we go to defend.”
While Blueprint.ng views ActionAid’s criticism of the N135.22 billion earmarked for post-election litigation ahead of the 2027 general elections as constructive and within the ambit of democratic principles and practice, the group’s position is seemingly contradictory.
In one breath the group underscored the importance of democracy and in another it suggested that the funds allocated to defend the ballot should be channeled to other critical sectors of the economy. Although this appears illogical, it should not detract from the substance of the matter.
Thus, this newspaper believes that the resolution of the controversy trailing the high number of litigation arising from elections and its deleterious consequences such as high cost and distortions in governance lies squarely with political parties and their aspirants who are desperate to win elections at all costs.
It has been established that Nigeria’s election, especially the conduct of primaries for the nomination of candidates by political parties, is one of the most litigated in the world. The chief cause of this undesirable situation is the lack of internal democracy and the wanton breach of extant laws by political parties in the country.
We, therefore, urge the 21 registered political parties bracing up for the 2027 general elections to live above board in the conduct of their primary elections. Political parties and their aspirants must endeavour to play by the rule and discard the do-or-die politics syndrome.
Political parties, in particular, must strictly adhere to the provisions of the Electoral Act, their respective constitutions, as well as other rules and regulations guiding the conduct of primaries and the general elections. This is the panacea for reducing the high number litigation and its concomitant exorbitant cost.