Nigeria’s New Electoral Amendment 2026: No More Delegate Politics, No More Imposition — Every Candidate Must Test Their Popularity
Nigeria’s evolving democratic journey has once again taken a significant turn with the latest amendment to the Electoral Act, recently assented to by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. The amendment introduces sweeping changes that directly affect how political parties conduct primaries, how votes are accredited and transmitted, and how election disputes are managed. More importantly, it reshapes internal party democracy by eliminating indirect primaries and maintaining direct primaries and consensus as the only approved modes of candidate selection.
In a political climate where allegations of candidate imposition and elite manipulation have long defined internal party processes, this development represents a structural shift. It is a reform that directly speaks to the credibility of Nigeria’s electoral system ahead of the 2027 general elections.
The debate that followed the amendment’s passage — especially on social media platform X — further underscores how politically sensitive these changes are. Conversations quickly turned to whether the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) was reacting strategically to the political relevance of Peter Obi, and whether the removal of indirect primaries reshapes power dynamics within Nigeria’s major political parties.
But beyond political rivalry narratives, the substance of the amendment deserves careful analysis.
End of Indirect Primaries: A Structural Shift in Party Democracy
One of the most consequential provisions in the new amendment is the removal of indirect primaries. Under Section 84(2), political parties are now limited to either direct primaries or consensus. The delegate-based system — commonly referred to as indirect primaries — has been completely expunged.
Indirect primaries historically allowed party delegates, often selected or influenced by powerful political actors, to choose candidates on behalf of party members. In practice, this system was frequently criticized for enabling bloc capture, elite gatekeeping, and political imposition.
With indirect primaries removed, every aspirant seeking party nomination must now either:
1. Face the entire registered membership of their party in direct primaries, or
2. Secure unanimous written consent under a consensus arrangement.
If consensus fails to achieve unanimity, the law mandates a reversion to direct primaries.
This provision significantly raises the bar for aspirants. It becomes more difficult for a small group of influential delegates to determine outcomes behind closed doors. Instead, candidates must mobilize broader grassroots support within their parties.
In effect, popularity — not proximity to power brokers — becomes central.
Consensus Safeguards: No More Backroom Deals
Section 87 introduces an important safeguard for consensus arrangements. While consensus remains permitted, it is no longer a vague or loosely applied option. It now requires written consent from all aspirants.
If even one aspirant refuses to consent, the party must conduct direct primaries.
This removes the common practice where aspirants were pressured to step down under political intimidation. It discourages imposition and forces parties to either achieve genuine unanimity or face the membership base directly.
Codification of BVAS in Law
Another major reform is the formal codification of BVAS (Bimodal Voter Accreditation System) into law. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had introduced BVAS during the 2023 elections to strengthen voter accreditation and reduce fraud.
By embedding BVAS into statutory law, the amendment institutionalizes electronic voter accreditation as a permanent feature of Nigeria’s electoral system. This means accreditation must now be conducted electronically using biometric verification.
This move strengthens election integrity by minimizing multiple voting and identity manipulation.
Electronic Transmission of Results
The amendment mandates electronic transmission of election results. This addresses one of the most controversial aspects of past elections.
Where network failures occur, the signed physical result sheet remains valid. However, results must be electronically stored in a digital register.
This dual safeguard ensures:
Transparency in result collation
Reduced opportunity for result tampering
Digital archiving for audit and verification
Electronic transmission has been a long-standing demand by civil society groups and election observers, and its codification marks a significant institutional reform.
Stronger Penalties for Electoral Offences
The amendment also introduces stricter punishment for electoral fraud. Result falsification now attracts a minimum of ten years imprisonment.
Historically, weak enforcement and mild penalties have emboldened election malpractice. By raising the legal consequences, the law signals a zero-tolerance stance toward manipulation.
Whether enforcement will match legislative intent remains to be seen, but the statutory framework is now considerably stronger.
Clearer Timelines for Electoral Preparation
The amendment establishes clearer timelines:
Notice of election: 300 days before polling
Candidate submission deadline: 120 days before polling
These timelines reduce uncertainty and provide political parties with structured preparation windows. It also enhances predictability in electoral administration, which is critical for democratic stability.
Overvoting Safeguards and Seven-Day Review Window
Votes exceeding accredited voters are to be automatically cancelled — a measure aimed at eliminating inflated vote counts.
Additionally, INEC is granted a seven-day window to review declarations made under duress. This is particularly important in scenarios where returning officers might be pressured into announcing compromised results.
Such provisions address historical weaknesses in Nigeria’s electoral process.
Political Reactions and the Peter Obi Debate
The amendment’s passage immediately triggered heated commentary online.
Supporters and critics debated whether the removal of indirect primaries was politically strategic. Some commentators suggested that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu remains politically attentive to the influence of Peter Obi, particularly after the 2023 general elections in which Obi mobilized a significant youth-driven movement.
Others dismissed the idea, arguing that the reform is institutional rather than personal.
Some commentary also focused on the regional implications of removing delegate-controlled indirect primaries. In regions with higher numbers of Local Government Areas — and consequently larger delegate pools — indirect primaries historically provided strategic leverage.
With direct primaries as the fallback option, that leverage structure shifts dramatically. Power moves from selected delegates to mass membership.
This change potentially disrupts traditional kingmaker politics.
Elite Manipulation Reduced
By eliminating indirect primaries, the amendment reduces the likelihood of bloc capture. Delegate-based systems were often susceptible to financial inducement and elite coordination.
Direct primaries, while more expensive and logistically demanding, distribute decision-making power more broadly.
The reform could:
Strengthen internal party democracy
Increase grassroots participation
Reduce political godfatherism
Encourage aspirants to build genuine popularity
The phrase now echoing across political discourse is simple: “Every candidate must test their popularity.”
The Bigger Democratic Picture
Nigeria’s democracy has long been shaped by internal party structures that sometimes undermined broader electoral credibility. While general elections often attract scrutiny, party primaries are equally critical.
Candidate imposition at the party level ultimately affects voter choice at the national level.
By restructuring how candidates emerge, the amendment addresses a root cause of democratic dissatisfaction.
However, laws alone do not guarantee outcomes. Implementation, party compliance, and INEC’s administrative capacity will determine whether these reforms translate into practical transformation.
Conclusion: A Turning Point or Another Political Adjustment?
The new electoral amendment is ambitious. It codifies technology, strengthens penalties, clarifies timelines, eliminates indirect primaries, and imposes consensus safeguards.
It represents one of the most structurally significant changes to Nigeria’s electoral framework since the Electoral Act 2022.
Whether motivated purely by democratic reform or influenced by shifting political calculations, the practical implication is clear:
Imposition has been formally discouraged. Delegate politics has been dismantled. Candidates must now face party members directly or secure unanimous consent.
As Nigeria moves toward 2027, the true test will not be in legislative text but in execution.
For now, one message stands unmistakably strong:
Every candidate must test their popularity.
0 Comments