2027: Governorship aspirants spent N30bn on primary elections — EFCC boss

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has raised significant alarm over the exorbitant spending by governorship aspirants in primary elections for the 2027 general elections, with figures reportedly reaching N30 billion. This revelation underscores a critical challenge to Nigeria's democratic integrity and the efficacy of its campaign finance regulations. The EFCC's commitment to deploying advanced technological tools, including drones, for enhanced election monitoring signals a heightened enforcement posture. This article examines the existing legal framework under the Electoral Act, 2022, and the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, highlighting the disparities between reported spending and statutory limits, the challenges of enforcement, and the implications for political accountability and anti-corruption efforts in Nigeria.

The recent declaration by the Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Ola Olukoyede, that some governorship aspirants for the 2027 general elections allegedly spent between N20 billion and N30 billion during their party primaries, has sent ripples through Nigeria's political and legal landscape. This staggering figure starkly contrasts with the statutory limits on election expenses, raising profound questions about the integrity of the electoral process and the pervasive influence of illicit money in politics. The EFCC's warning, coupled with its stated intention to deploy advanced technological tools like drones for election monitoring, signals a renewed and intensified focus on curbing financial malpractices in the lead-up to the next election cycle.

This development is not merely a matter of financial impropriety; it strikes at the heart of democratic governance, fostering an environment where public office is perceived as an investment rather than a call to service. Such excessive spending, particularly at the primary election stage, often fuels corruption, as successful candidates may seek to recoup their 'investments' once in office. This article delves into the pertinent legal framework governing campaign finance in Nigeria, primarily the Electoral Act, 2022, and the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, to dissect the challenges of enforcement, the existing loopholes, and the broader implications for legal practitioners and the future of Nigeria's democracy.

Nigeria's legal framework for regulating political finance is primarily enshrined in the 1999 Constitution, the Electoral Act, 2022, and the Independent National Electoral Commission's (INEC) regulations. The Electoral Act, 2022, a significant legislative reform, aims to enhance transparency and accountability in the electoral process. Key provisions include Section 88, which sets specific limitations on election expenses for candidates vying for various offices. For a governorship election, the maximum amount of election expenses a candidate can incur is N1,000,000,000 (One Billion Naira). Furthermore, Section 88(8) stipulates that no individual or entity shall donate more than N50,000,000 (Fifty Million Naira) to a candidate.

Beyond individual candidate spending, the Electoral Act, 2022, also addresses political party finances. Section 89 mandates that election expenses incurred by political parties shall be determined by INEC in consultation with the parties, requiring the submission of detailed audited returns within six months after an election. Section 90(3) prohibits political parties from accepting monetary or other contributions exceeding N50,000,000 unless the source is identified to INEC. Complementing these electoral provisions is the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, which repealed its 2011 predecessor. This Act provides a robust framework for combating financial crimes, including those related to illicit election financing, by prohibiting transaction splitting to evade reporting thresholds (N5,000,000 for individuals and N10,000,000 for corporate bodies) and imposing stringent obligations on financial institutions regarding customer identification, particularly for Politically Exposed Persons (PEPs).

The EFCC's assertion that governorship aspirants spent up to N30 billion on primary elections for 2027 highlights a glaring discrepancy with the N1 billion limit prescribed for governorship candidates in the general election under Section 88(3) of the Electoral Act, 2022. A critical challenge in addressing this disparity lies in the definition of "election expenses" within the Electoral Act. Section 89(1) defines election expenses as costs incurred by a political party from the date INEC gives notice to conduct an election up to and including the polling day. This definition has historically created a loophole, as expenses incurred during party primaries, before a candidate formally emerges, are often argued to fall outside this scope. While INEC's "Regulations and Guidelines for Political Parties, 2022" acknowledge contributions to *aspirants* during primaries, the explicit spending limits in the Electoral Act primarily target *candidates* in the general election, leaving a regulatory gap for the often-prohibitive costs of securing party tickets.

Enforcement of campaign finance regulations has historically been a significant hurdle in Nigeria, despite seemingly robust legal provisions. Political parties often find ways to circumvent these laws, and the sheer volume of transactions makes comprehensive monitoring difficult. The EFCC, in collaboration with INEC, is tasked with investigating and prosecuting financial crimes, including those related to elections. The EFCC's plan to deploy drones and other technological tools for election monitoring, particularly to track vote-buying and financial inducements, represents an innovative, albeit potentially controversial, approach to enforcement. While such technology could enhance surveillance, its deployment must navigate constitutional provisions on privacy, ensuring that monitoring efforts do not infringe upon fundamental rights.

The Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, offers a powerful complementary tool in the fight against illicit election financing. Its provisions on prohibiting transaction splitting, enhanced due diligence for PEPs, and mandatory reporting obligations for financial institutions can be leveraged by the EFCC to trace the sources and movement of large sums of money allegedly spent during primaries. The Act's focus on identifying the beneficial owners of funds and criminalizing attempts to obscure financial trails provides a legal basis for investigating the N30 billion expenditure, even if the Electoral Act's definition of "election expenses" proves restrictive for primary elections. The overarching goal is to prevent the commercialization of votes and ensure that leaders are accountable to the public, not to financiers who expect a return on their 'investment'.

The EFCC's stark warning regarding the N30 billion allegedly spent by governorship aspirants in primary elections for 2027 underscores the urgent need for a more robust and comprehensive approach to campaign finance regulation and enforcement in Nigeria. While the Electoral Act, 2022, provides a foundational framework, the current interpretation and application of "election expenses" often fail to capture the significant financial outlays during party primaries, creating a critical loophole that undermines the spirit of the law. The collaboration between the EFCC and INEC, coupled with the strategic deployment of technology, is a commendable step towards enhancing oversight, but it must be meticulously implemented within the bounds of constitutional rights.

For legal practitioners, this development signals a period of heightened scrutiny on political finance. Attorneys advising political parties, aspirants, and candidates must emphasize strict adherence to the Electoral Act, 2022, and the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, particularly concerning spending limits, donation thresholds, and disclosure requirements. There is a compelling case for legislative review to explicitly extend campaign finance limits to primary elections, thereby closing existing loopholes and fostering greater transparency. The integrity of Nigeria's democratic process hinges on its ability to curb the corrosive influence of illicit money, ensuring that public office is not auctioned to the highest bidder but earned through a fair and transparent electoral contest.