Reps’ new bill on dual party membership

Recently, the House of Representatives speedily passed an amendment to the 2026 Electoral Act criminalising dual membership of political parties. The amendment, sponsored by the House Leader, Julius Ihonvbere, proposes a two-year jail term, a fine of N10 million, or both, for individuals who knowingly register or maintain membership in more than one political party simultaneously.

The amendment bill introduces three new subsections to Section 77 of the 2026 Electoral Act. It went through first, second and third readings, and passed the same day. Protests by some members of the House against the bill were ignored.

Section 77(8) of the amendment stipulates that a person shall not be registered as a member of more than one political party at the same time. Subsection 9 provides that a person who registered as a member of more than one political party at the same time shall cease to be registered as a valid member of any political party pending regularization in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the constitution of the party concerned. Subsection 10 stipulates penalty for dual membership of political parties.

The Reps’ move has generated debate regarding potential conflicts with Section 40 of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees freedom of association. Opposition figures see the bill as an attempt by the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) to prevent defections and curb competition ahead of the 2027 elections. Some analysts argue that, in the absence of independent candidacy, this proposed law inhibits political mobility and shrinks the democratic space.

But promoters of the new amendment say it seeks to address concerns about the potential for fraudulent, unauthorized registration of individuals into multiple political parties. It is apparently meant to reinforce party discipline and enforce commitment of politicians to a single platform as well as strengthen the integrity of the country’s electoral process. Nevertheless, we wonder why the Reps closed their eyes to more contentious provisions in the Electoral Act 2026, swiftly signed by President Bola Tinubu on February 18, 2026. The Inter-Party Advisory Council (IPAC) recently raised concerns about some of these provisions, which it described as “anomalies”. 

IPAC national chairman, Yusuf Dantalle, said several irregularities were identified during the review of the Electoral Act. He noted that proposals from various parties were forwarded to the National Assembly Joint Committee on the Amendment of the Electoral Act, but they were not included in the final version of the law. Hence, the umbrella body of registered political parties rejected the Electoral Act. It says parts of the new law weaken multiparty democracy, restrict the rights of political parties to manage their own affairs, and could affect the credibility and acceptance of the next general election if left unchanged. It threatened to boycott the 2027 elections if controversial provisions in the new Act were not urgently amended.

One of these controversial provisions is in Section 60(3) of the Act. This deals with the mode of transmission of election results. Most Nigerians yearned for the mandatory real-time electronic transmission of election results. This is to prevent what happened in the 2023 presidential election where the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) abandoned e-transmission of results, claiming technical glitches. It resorted to manual transfer of results which gave room for manipulation and cast doubt about the outcome of the election. The newly amended Act provides for e-transmission of results but with a proviso that manual transfer will be used where there is network failure.

Another contentious aspect of the amended Act is Section 84(2), which excludes indirect primaries as a method of nominating candidates. IPAC argues that the established principle, affirmed by several judicial pronouncements, is that political parties possess certain rights in the administration of their internal affairs. This means that no one should dictate to them the mode of party primaries. Many Nigerians are also concerned about the removal of certificate forgery as a ground for filing election petitions in the newly amended Electoral Act 2026. Section 138(3) requires the courts to impose fines of not less than N5 million on counsel and not less than N10 million on the petitioner when election petitions are filed on grounds outside the ones recognized by the Act.

Laws are made to punish criminals not to shield them. The legal and moral implications of this law are obvious. Lawmakers are supposed to enact laws that will promote honesty, transparency, discipline and accountability. But what they have done amounts to weakening those principles. Besides, the constitution stipulates the qualifications required for various elective offices. The Act cannot override such constitutional provisions.

It is surprising that members of the House see dual party membership as a crime but fail to see certificate forgery as one. The hasty passing of the bill shows that there is more to it than ensuring that no politician belongs to more than one party simultaneously. Already, there are existing laws that require citizens to belong to one political party at a time. Such laws should have been strictly applied.  The new bill appears targeted at some politicians to prevent them from having a platform to contest the 2027 election. It should be thrown out.