By Obinna Uballa
Concerns have emerged from political parties, civil society groups, and election observers over the Federal Government’s proposed N135.22 billion allocation for “Electoral Adjudication and Post-Election Provision” in the 2026 budget, a move many described as excessive and potentially indicative of expected disputes in the 2027 elections.
The provision, recently captured in the House of Representatives Order Paper for March 31, 2026, sits under Service-Wide Votes – a centrally managed fund designed to cover obligations not tied to a specific ministry or agency.
While such votes are typically used for unforeseen contingencies or national obligations, critics argue that earmarking such a huge sum for post-election litigation raises serious questions about transparency and electoral preparedness.
The People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and the African Democratic Congress (ADC) were among the first to voice concerns. In an interview with Punch Newspaper, PDP National Publicity Secretary Ini Ememobong questioned why such extensive legal funding would be necessary, suggesting it reflects a lack of confidence in the electoral process.
“It means that INEC itself is anticipating that it will not do well and that people will not accept the outcome of the results,” he said, arguing that greater transparency during elections could drastically reduce post-election litigation.
Similarly, ADC National Publicity Secretary Bolaji Abdullahi noted that while post-election litigation is normal, the N135 billion allocation appears disproportionate to what should reasonably be required.
“If elections are free and transparent, litigation should be minimal,” he said, stressing that excessive budgeting for legal battles raises concerns about accountability and governance.
Adding weight to these criticisms, political economist Prof. Pat Utomi questioned the logic behind the Federal Government budgeting for elections at all. “It is not the Federal Government that goes to elections; it is the individual candidates. So why should the Federal Government have a budget for it?” he said, insisting that any such expenditures should fall under the Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) budget.
Human rights lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) also criticized the allocation, describing it as “excessive and unjustifiable.”
He pointed out that INEC already has in-house legal departments in all 36 states, which handle the majority of election-related cases. Citing the 2023 elections, he said, “INEC was joined in less than 3,500 pre-election cases, election petitions, and appeals arising from them,” adding that the ouster of courts’ jurisdiction in internal party affairs and improved electoral conduct would likely reduce litigation further.
Falana estimated that overall spending on election litigation should not exceed N20 billion – far below the proposed N135 billion.
Civil society organisations also expressed unease. Anthony Ubani, Executive Director of #FixPolitics Africa, warned that such a large allocation signals deeper flaws in Nigeria’s electoral system.
“A credible electoral system should settle outcomes at the ballot box, not in the courtroom. But in Nigeria, elections are increasingly fought in three stages: primaries, voting day, and then the tribunal,” he said, stressing that heavy reliance on courts undermines public trust and incentivises manipulation. He urged reforms including mandatory real-time electronic transmission of results to reduce malpractice and the need for post-election litigation.
Debo Adeniran, Executive Director of the Centre for Anti-Corruption and Open Leadership, acknowledged that some contingency planning for legal disputes may be justified, but warned against duplication, particularly given INEC’s substantial budget allocation. He stressed that public funds should not be used to indirectly support political parties in election-related litigation.
Auwal Rafsanjani, Executive Director of the Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre, described the allocation as “troubling,” suggesting it indicates an expectation of widespread disputes. He urged the government and INEC to focus on conducting transparent, credible elections rather than budgeting to manage post-election conflicts. “A credible electoral process would significantly reduce the need for litigation, minimise waste, and ensure fairness,” Rafsanjani said.
The N135.22 billion line item sits within the broader Consolidated Revenue Fund charges, which total N3.70 trillion, making the post-election provision approximately 3.65 percent of this segment. It accompanies a N1.01 trillion statutory transfer to INEC for the 2026 fiscal year-the largest recipient in that category.
Statutory transfers, which are constitutionally mandated, provide agencies with financial autonomy to carry out core functions.
INEC itself has requested N873.78 billion for the 2027 general elections, a significant increase from the N313.4 billion released for the 2023 polls.
The commission also demanded N171 billion for its operations in 2026, indicating anticipated fiscal pressures as Nigeria prepares for the next general elections.
