Concerns About 2026 General Elections

Key Highlights of the Electoral Act Amendment Proposal

If the National Assembly does not make any changes to the proposal, the presidential, governorship, and national and state assembly elections will be held in or before November next year. This is a significant development as it forms the core of a bill seeking to repeal the 2022 Electoral Act and enact a new Electoral Act in 2025.

The amendment proposal was discussed during a one-day public hearing by the Joint Committee on Electoral Matters, chaired by Senator Simon Lalong. Concerns were raised about the feasibility and logic behind moving the election date forward. Stakeholders, political parties, civil society organizations (CSOs), and electoral experts have all weighed in on the issue.

The proposed amendment outlines that elections for the offices of president and governors must occur “not later than 185 days before the expiration of the term of office of the last holder of the office.” The provision also extends to elections into the National Assembly and state Houses of Assembly, which must now be held “not later than 185 days before the date on which each of the Houses stands dissolved.”

In addition, if a vacancy occurs in any of the Houses more than 90 days before the general elections, such a vacancy must be filled within 30 days of its occurrence. The amendment also aims to align the new electoral calendar with constitutional changes to Sections 76, 116, 132, and 178, which now delegate election timelines to the Electoral Act rather than the Constitution.

Before the public hearing, it was reported that politicians, especially those hoping to seek elective offices in 2027, had assumed that the next general elections would follow the traditional pattern of being held in February or March of the inauguration year. However, the proposed changes have sparked widespread debate.

Reactions from Political and Civil Society Actors

Some stakeholders are pleased with the move, believing it will allow enough time for legal issues to be resolved before the inauguration of new administrations. Others, however, argue that it may favor incumbents and could negatively impact governance.

Chairman of the House Committee on Electoral Matters, Adebayo Balogun, stated that the amendment would help prevent situations where court cases linger after winners assume office. He suggested reducing the current 180 days allowed for tribunal judgments to 90 days, with appellate and Supreme Court decisions taking no more than 60 days each, all within 185 days before inauguration.

Despite the interest generated, the Senate stepped down the bill to allow for more consultations and a deeper understanding of its provisions. The Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, noted that sufficient details on the general principles of the bill were not provided and suggested an executive session to consider it.

Divergent Opinions from Political Parties

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) criticized the move, arguing that advancing the election date would undermine governance. They warned that it could lead to a perpetual campaign cycle, short periods for effective governance, and disruptions in development planning.

On the other hand, factions of the Labour Party had differing opinions. While the faction led by Julius Abure expressed readiness for the exercise if it holds next year, the Lamidi Apapa-led faction dismissed the idea as unconstitutional and premature.

The Obidient Movement’s coordinator, Yunusa Tanko, questioned the proposal, stating it contradicts the constitutionally guaranteed four-year term of elected officeholders. He argued that the plan was too sudden and lacked clarity on its legal and practical implications.

Impact on Opposition Parties

The New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) spokesperson, Ladipo Johnson, described the proposal as “a good idea coming at the wrong time.” He noted that while the intention behind the amendment could help resolve post-election litigations before swearing-in, the timing would disadvantage opposition parties.

Efforts to get reactions from the major opposition party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), proved unsuccessful. Meanwhile, the Director of the Abuja School of Social and Political Thoughts, Dr. Sam Amadi, hinted that the planned amendment might favor the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC).

INEC’s Position and Future Steps

When contacted, the Deputy Director of Publicity at the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Wilfred Osilama Ifogah, stated that the commission has not taken any decision regarding the conduct of elections next year. He emphasized that the House of Representatives has not yet taken a position on the proposed amendments.

The Executive Director of YIAGA Africa, Mr. Samson Itodo, supported the proposal, highlighting its benefits in providing clarity for INEC and other institutions. He believed it would allow for robust campaign periods without political interference.

Challenges Ahead

Despite the interest, the bill will not receive an accelerated hearing now that it has been stepped down for further consultations. The outcome of the ongoing constitution review process will also play a crucial role in determining the final decision.

Chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Electoral Matters mentioned that his committee is working with the constitution review committee to ensure synergy. He noted that the Electoral Act is currently delayed due to the constitution review process.

If the amendment passes, there are concerns that INEC may struggle to cope, given the numerous off-cycle elections scheduled before 2027. Former Minister of Sports, Solomon Dalung, alleged that the government might want to overload INEC so that it can be blamed for glitches.