Follow Us on Google
By Eze Onyekpere
The Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) provides limitations on candidate’s expenditure in elections. The essence is to reduce the influence of money in electioneering as this will guarantee that the votes reflect the actual will of the majority. The limitation is also meant to reduce corruption in governance because an overtly monetised electoral process will throw up public officials who see electioneering as an investment, as there will be costs and profits to be recouped from the public treasury. This discourse reviews the provisions of the Electoral Act on this subject, its implications, challenges and the way forward.
By S.91 of the Electoral Act: “(1) Election expenses shall not exceed the sum stipulated in subsection (2) – (7) of this section.(2) The maximum election expenses to be incurred by a candidate at a Presidential election shall be one billion naira (N1,000,000,000).(3) The maximum election expenses to be incurred by a candidate at a Governorship election shall be two hundred million naira (N200,000,000).(4) The maximum amount of election expenses to be incurred in respect of senatorial seat by a candidate at an election to the National Assembly shall be forty million naira (N40,000,000) while the seat for House of Representatives shall be twenty million naira (N20,000,000). (5) In the case of State Assembly election, the maximum amount of election expenses to be incurred shall be ten million naira (N10,000,000).(6) In the case of a chairmanship election to an Area Council, the maximum amount of election expenses to be incurred shall be ten million naira (N10,000,000).(7) In the case of councillorship election to an Area Council, the maximum amount of election expenses to be incurred shall be one million naira (N1,000, 000).(8) In determining the total expenditure incurred in relation to the candidature of any person at any election, no account shall be taken of:-(a) any deposit made by the candidate on his/her nomination in compliance with the law;(b) any expenditure incurred before the notification of the date fixed for the election with respect to services rendered or material supplied before such notification; (c) Political party expenses in respect of the candidate standing for a particular election.(9) No individual or other entity shall donate more than one million naira (N1, 000,000) to any candidate”.
The first issue is that the heading of this provision is misleading, considering that what is being limited is candidate’s expenditure on the election while political parties are still free to spend on the candidate. The proper heading should be one focused on the candidate and not otherwise. The heading should read “Limitation on election expenses of candidates”.
The second issue with this limitation is in its placement in the body of the Act. The implication is that any alteration will require the amendment of the law by the National Assembly and assent by the President which is a long and cumbersome process. It is probable that these figures made sense at the time the law was enacted. Subsequent erosion of value through inflation and depreciation of the Naira meant that these figures need to be reviewed. Since 2010 when the Act was enacted, the Naira has lost over 150% of its value. The exchange rate was N150 to 1 United States Dollar 2010 compared to today’s official exchange rate of N390 while it exchanges for about N500 in the parallel market. Ideally, this should have been a power granted to INEC in consultation with stakeholders (political parties, Central Bank of Nigeria, National Bureau of Statistics, civil society, etc.) to review these limits from time to time. It is therefore proposed that in the amendment of the Electoral Act, this power should be granted to INEC and the draft should read: “(1) The Commission in consultation with the political parties, the Central Bank of Nigeria and other stakeholders shall have power to determine the maximum amount of money or other assets a candidate can spend at an election. (2) The Commission in consultation with the political parties, the Central Bank of Nigeria and stakeholders shall review the limitation in subsection (1) if it is satisfied that the value of the naira has been substantially altered”.
The third issue is that the logic and empirical basis of the above limitations were not articulated in the Act and INEC or the National Assembly has not come out with any justifications. Is it based on the number of voters to be addressed by the candidate or the land area to be covered or media and other expenses? The ceilings appear arbitrary. For instance, if a presidential candidate with 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory to cover is to spend N1billion, why should the Act allow a gubernatorial candidate with one out of 36 states to spend one fifth of the presidential candidate’s ceiling? If a senatorial zone is one third of a state, why did the Act not grant senatorial candidates one third of the governor’s ceiling? What is the relationship between the area covered by a senatorial seat and that of a House of Representatives seat? The provision of S.84 (2) of the repealed 2002 Electoral Act provides a clue on what is to be done.
It states that: “Election expenses incurred by a Political Party for the management or the conduct of an election shall not exceed in the aggregate the sum determined by multiplying 20 Naira by the number of names appearing in the final voters’ list for each Constituency where there is a candidate sponsored by the Political Party”.
This kind of provision provides an empirical foundation for expenditure by candidates and political parties and places a limitation which can be monitored and enforced. Again, the area and number of persons to be reached by the campaign and the expenditure should have a proportional relationship rather than the arbitrary fixing of limits in the extant law. Thus, this kind of provision should be used by INEC and stakeholders in exercise of the power suggested in issue 2 in determining the expenditure ceilings of candidates.
To be concluded tomorrow
Onyekpere, a lawyer, writes from Abuja
