Nigeria’s new electoral law has continued to generate numerous controversies despite the National Assembly’s assurances that it had made adequate provisions that would guarantee free and fair elections.
While some provisions of the law have been hailed as proactive, others have been categorised as retrogressive. The House of Representatives, HOR, though has further amended the Electoral Act, 2026, despite the law having been recently signed by President Tinubu is still generating concerns across the country. The bill seeks to amend Section 77 of the Electoral Act, 2026, by inserting new subsections aimed at strengthening party membership regulations and preventing what the lawmakers described as manipulative political practices capable of undermining party primaries and internal democracy.
It is however preposterous that the NASS had wittingly removed certificate forgery as a ground for filing election petitions in the newly amended Electoral Act 2026 and this has sparked widespread criticism from legal experts, political analysts and key stakeholders, who warn that the provision could weaken democracy.
It is clear that Section 138 of the Electoral Act 2026 outlines the grounds upon which an election may be challenged, but no longer includes certificate forgery which was one the provisions in the past.
Section 138(1) of the Act only states that an election may only be questioned on the grounds that the election was invalid due to corrupt practices or non-compliance with the provisions of the Act, or that the respondent was not duly elected by a majority of lawful votes cast. This is at best vague and not specify certificate forgery.
The law further stipulates that acts or omissions that merely contradict instructions or directives of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, but do not violate the Act itself, cannot serve as grounds for questioning an election.
But the amendment has drawn sharp many Nigerians who have questioned the legality and moral implications of removing certificate forgery as a basis for challenging election results. This is viewed as a dangerous trend if allowed to remain as it would allow potential criminal to perpetuate themselves in the corridors of power despite having questionable credentials.
We view this as a disturbing attempt by the political class to weaken established standards of accountability which should be allowed in any sane society.
This is an outrageous scenario and a brazen attempt to redefine a society’s moral code by a morally compromised political class as it would turn out that criminals are inadvertently being called to take over the reins of leadership on a stolen banner.
The moral standard is going to be lowered and compromised in a situation where the law does not criminalise certificate forgery.
For the benefit of hindsight, it may not be inappropriate to recall a few contemporary instances where certificate forgery or possession of doubtful credentials have plunged victims to face dire consequences.
There are cases involving ministers who had to vacate their high offices over issues relating to certificate scandals. One not too long ago, resigned following what was regarded as possessing a doubtful credential.
AljazirahNigeria like many critics is concerned that such a weighty provision which indeed could serve as deterrent for political office seekers has been completely relegated and pushed off relevance. There is every need for the NASS to return to the drawing board and include layers of clauses not just on certificate forgery but anything that has a semblance of perjury by seekers of public office generally.
We applaud the amendment which further criminalises deliberate dual party membership, as anyone who knowingly registers or maintains membership in more than one political party commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine of N10,000,000 or to imprisonment for a term of two years, or both.
