Opposition Parties Reject Electoral Act 2026, Allege Bias Toward APC

Opposition parties have intensified criticism of the newly enacted Electoral Act 2026, arguing that key provisions on candidate selection, campaign financing and election timelines tilt the political field in favour of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC).

The debate followed the passage of the harmonised Electoral Act Bill by the National Assembly on Tuesday and its signing into law by President Bola Tinubu on Wednesday, paving the way for new electoral guidelines ahead of the 2027 general elections.

While the Presidency and the APC described the amendments as reforms aimed at strengthening democratic practice and improving electoral integrity, opposition figures contend that the changes weaken political competition.

Central to the disagreement is Section 84(2) of the amended law, which limits political parties to either direct primaries or consensus arrangements in selecting candidates, eliminating the option of indirect (delegate-based) primaries permitted under the 2022 Act.

Opposition parties argue that the removal of delegate primaries restricts party autonomy and places financial and logistical strain on smaller parties.

The National Publicity Secretary of the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP), Oladipo Johnson, accused lawmakers of shaping the legislation to favour the APC-led government.

“We have done direct primaries before. So, why are they bringing it back? Direct primaries make it easier for people to send thugs to party primaries in an area to cause chaos. But where you have delegates, we know who they are.

“Everything they have done is geared towards helping themselves. It would seem like this government is carrying out vendetta by going after people who wouldn’t want to donate for election campaigns openly for an opposition party contesting against the party in power,” he said.

Similarly, the National Publicity Secretary of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Bolaji Abdullahi, maintained that direct primaries demand extensive resources that many opposition parties lack, potentially undermining their competitiveness.

The Coalition of United Political Parties (CUPP), through its National Secretary, Peter Ameh, described the amendment as an attempt to consolidate political dominance.

“Direct primaries are expensive and logistically complex. This will make it difficult for opposition parties to compete and may centralise control of candidate selection,” Ameh said.

He warned that the provision could amount to legislative intrusion into the internal operations of political parties, which enjoy constitutional independence.

Stakeholders have also expressed reservations over revised campaign finance rules and election timelines.

Under the amended Section 94, anonymous donations are banned, and penalties for exceeding contribution limits now include forfeiture of excess funds. In addition, the timeframe for election petition tribunals in Area Council elections has been shortened from 180 days to 150 days.

The CUPP argued that reduced campaign periods and tighter funding timelines for the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) could disadvantage opposition parties and hinder adequate preparation.

“These changes favour incumbency and weaken the capacity of opposition parties to organise effectively,” the coalition said.

The National Coordinator of the Obidient Movement Worldwide, Yunusa Tanko, described the amendment process as politically driven and criticised the changes to primary procedures and campaign durations.

“You now reduce the number of days for the campaign. Not only that, you went ahead to ensure that you stop every idea of how the primary of a political party can take place. You stated that the law says you either have a consensus or an indirect primary while trying to show you are people-oriented.

“Meanwhile, you are not. You are only working against the interests of the opposition so that they cannot be able to stand up to you. They go into all political parties to cause commotion, distortion, and all of that,” he said.

Tanko added that the combined effect of the provisions could entrench what he termed a “rigging machine” ahead of the 2027 elections.

“What we are seeing is an attempt to legitimise illegality and constrain opposition parties,” he said.

The APC dismissed the allegations, insisting that the reforms would enhance internal democracy and broaden participation in candidate selection.

The party’s Deputy Organising Secretary, Nze Duru, said direct primaries give all registered party members the opportunity to vote for candidates.

“Direct primaries allow every party member to participate in choosing candidates. That is the purest form of democracy. Any true democrat should support that,” he said.

Duru argued that delegate-based primaries concentrate decision-making power in the hands of a few individuals and may not accurately reflect the broader wishes of party members.

He also denied claims that the ruling party intends to interfere in the affairs of opposition parties.

“The APC is not interested in the internal affairs of other parties. We are committed to free, fair and credible elections,” he added.

With the new law now in force, political parties are preparing to adjust their internal processes, even as debate over its implications continues.