The Federal Government has sparked outrage after revealing a staggering N135.22bn budget line for “Electoral Adjudication and Post Election Provision” — a massive fund critics say anticipates courtroom battles rather than credible elections.
The controversial allocation appears in the House of Representatives’ 2026 Appropriation Bill under Service-Wide Votes, the government’s catch-all fund for obligations not tied to specific ministries.
But opposition parties and civil society groups are alarmed.
“It means that INEC itself is anticipating that it will not do well,” said Ini Ememobong of the People’s Democratic Party.
“If elections are transparent, post-election litigation will be reduced drastically. Why are we budgeting for disputes instead of credibility?”
Bolaji Abdullahi of the African Democratic Congress also slammed the allocation, calling N135bn “excessive” and questioning the need for such a large sum.
“A credible election should be settled at the ballot box, not in the courtroom,” he said, warning that such spending could erode public confidence in the democratic process.
Renowned economist Pat Utomi added fuel to the fire:
“It is not the Federal Government that goes to elections, it is the individual candidates. So why should the FG have a budget for it?”
Human rights lawyer Femi Falana described the spending as “on the very high side”, noting that INEC already has an in-house legal team.
“Altogether, INEC may not spend up to N20bn on election legal battles,” he said, calling the N135bn figure “unjustifiable.”
Civil society voices are equally scathing. Anthony Ubani of #FixPolitics Africa warned the allocation “signals a lack of trust in the electoral process.”
“When a country budgets this heavily for litigation, it suggests elections are expected to be contested rather than accepted,” Ubani said.
“This encourages manipulation, reduces accountability, and shifts the battleground from the people to the courts.”
Debo Adeniran echoed the concern:
“If this budget is for INEC, fine. But if it benefits political parties, that would be abnormal. Double-dipping with taxpayers’ money is unacceptable.”
Civil society advocate Auwal Rafsanjani concluded:
“The priority must be credible elections, not courtroom wars. Stop budgeting to manage disputes; start budgeting to ensure transparency and fairness.”
With Nigeria heading into the 2027 elections, the N135bn allocation has cast a long shadow over the democratic process, leaving citizens asking: are we funding credible elections or preparing for legal battles?
