NG Electoral Act 2022: Ekiti APC Primary Dispute Raises Data Protection Concerns

A recent political dispute within the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Ekiti State, Nigeria, has brought to the fore critical legal questions concerning electoral eligibility and data privacy. A lawmaker, Mr. Akinlayo, released the salary records of a rival aspirant, Mr. Ibrahim, alleging that the latter remained on the federal government payroll after claiming to have resigned, thereby contravening electoral laws. This incident highlights the stringent requirements for political appointees seeking elective office under the Electoral Act, 2022 (and its subsequent iterations), which mandates resignation prior to party primaries. Concurrently, it raises significant concerns regarding the legality of obtaining and disseminating personal financial information, implicating the Nigeria Data Protection Act (NDPA) 2023 and the constitutional right to privacy. The case underscores the complex interplay between political accountability, electoral integrity, and the evolving landscape of data protection jurisprudence in Nigeria.

The political landscape in Nigeria is frequently punctuated by pre-election disputes, often challenging the eligibility of aspirants. A recent development in the All Progressives Congress (APC) primary election for Ekiti North Federal Constituency II has intensified this trend, drawing attention to the intersection of electoral law and data protection. Mr. Kolawole Akinlayo, a federal lawmaker, publicly released what he claimed were the payslips of his rival, Mr. Kunle Ibrahim, for April and May 2026. Mr. Akinlayo asserts that these documents conclusively prove Mr. Ibrahim, a former presidential aide, remained on the federal government payroll despite his purported resignation, thereby rendering him ineligible to contest the primary election.

This contentious act has ignited a multi-faceted legal debate. On one hand, it squarely addresses the statutory requirement for public officers to resign their appointments before participating in party primaries, a cornerstone of electoral integrity designed to ensure a level playing field and prevent abuse of public office. On the other hand, the unilateral disclosure of an individual's salary records, irrespective of the underlying political motivation, raises profound questions about the right to privacy and the burgeoning regulatory framework for data protection in Nigeria. This article will delve into these critical legal dimensions, examining the implications for political aspirants, public institutions, and the enforcement of data protection laws.

The legal framework governing the eligibility of political aspirants in Nigeria is primarily enshrined in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), the Electoral Act, and the Public Service Rules. Specifically, Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act, 2022, a provision that generated considerable debate and judicial scrutiny, stipulated that "No political appointee at any level shall be a voting delegate or be voted for at the convention or congress of any political party for the purpose of the nomination of candidates for any election." This provision effectively mandates the resignation of political appointees before they can participate in party primaries. The Supreme Court, in *President Muhammadu Buhari & Anor v. National Assembly & Ors* (2022), ultimately affirmed the validity of this section, dismissing the President's suit challenging its constitutionality. Furthermore, Rule 030423 of the Public Service Rules (2008 Edition, and subsequent iterations) explicitly states that "Resignation is necessary before seeking elective public office. Howbeit, any officer wishing to engage in partisan political activities or seek elective public office shall resign his/her appointment forthwith."

Complementing the electoral framework is the evolving regime of data protection. Nigeria enacted the Nigeria Data Protection Act (NDPA) 2023, which serves as the principal legislation safeguarding the fundamental rights and freedoms, and the interests of data subjects. The NDPA establishes the Nigeria Data Protection Commission (NDPC) as the supervisory and regulatory authority, with powers to issue regulations, conduct investigations, and impose sanctions. The Act defines "personal data" broadly and outlines lawful bases for processing, including consent, legitimate interest, and public interest. Prior to the NDPA, the Nigeria Data Protection Regulation (NDPR) 2019 provided some regulatory guidance. The constitutional right to privacy is guaranteed under Section 37 of the 1999 Constitution. Additionally, Section 14(1) of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 2011 allows public institutions to deny requests for information containing personal data, unless the data subject consents or the information is already publicly available.

The dispute in Ekiti State presents a direct challenge to the interpretation and enforcement of electoral eligibility criteria. Mr. Akinlayo's claim hinges on Section 88(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026 (which appears to be the current iteration of the provision previously known as Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act, 2022), mandating political appointees to resign before participating in primaries. The Supreme Court's decision in *President Muhammadu Buhari & Anor v. National Assembly & Ors* (2022) firmly established the legality of this requirement, affirming that political appointees must vacate their offices to contest. The case of *Tukur v. Mustapha* (2023), cited by Mr. Akinlayo, further reinforces this judicial stance, emphasizing that strict compliance with the resignation rule is essential. The critical question, therefore, is what constitutes an effective resignation. While Mr. Ibrahim claims to have resigned, the continued payment of salary in subsequent months, as alleged by Mr. Akinlayo, could be interpreted as evidence that the resignation was not fully processed or effective at the material time of the primary election. The burden would likely fall on Mr. Ibrahim to demonstrate that his resignation was duly submitted and accepted, and that any subsequent payments were either in error or for a period prior to the effective date of his resignation.

However, the method employed by Mr. Akinlayo – obtaining and publicly releasing Mr. Ibrahim's payslips – introduces a significant data protection dimension. The Nigeria Data Protection Act (NDPA) 2023 broadly protects personal data, which includes financial information like salary records. The processing of such data, including its collection and disclosure, must have a lawful basis as stipulated in the NDPA. These bases include the consent of the data subject, necessity for the performance of a contract, compliance with a legal obligation, protection of vital interests, performance of a task carried out in the public interest, or for the legitimate interests of the data controller or a third party. It is highly improbable that Mr. Akinlayo obtained Mr. Ibrahim's explicit consent for the release of his payslips. While arguments for "public interest" might be raised in the context of political accountability, the NDPA requires a careful balancing act. The public interest ground typically applies where processing is necessary for the exercise of official authority or a task carried out in the public interest, and it is not a blanket justification for unauthorized disclosure of personal data, especially by private individuals or rival politicians.

The unauthorized acquisition and dissemination of personal data could expose Mr. Akinlayo to liabilities under the NDPA 2023. The Act empowers the Nigeria Data Protection Commission (NDPC) to investigate breaches and impose administrative sanctions, which can include significant fines (up to 2% of annual gross revenue or NGN 10 million, whichever is greater, for data controllers of major importance). Furthermore, Section 37 of the Constitution guarantees the right to privacy, and individuals whose privacy rights are violated can seek redress. While the Freedom of Information Act 2011 allows for access to public records, Section 14(1) specifically protects personal information, requiring consent for its release unless it relates to the public duties of public employees and officials and is not genuinely private. The payslips, while related to public employment, are generally considered private financial information, making their unauthorized release problematic. The admissibility of such evidence in court, if illegally obtained, would also be a point of contention, though Nigerian courts have sometimes admitted illegally obtained evidence if it is relevant and its probative value outweighs the prejudice.

The Ekiti APC primary dispute serves as a potent reminder of the intricate legal challenges that arise at the intersection of electoral politics and individual rights in Nigeria. For political aspirants, the message is clear: strict adherence to the provisions of the Electoral Act regarding resignation from public office before contesting primaries is non-negotiable. The judicial pronouncements, particularly from the Supreme Court, underscore the gravity of this requirement, and any perceived non-compliance, even if technical, can lead to disqualification. Aspirants must ensure that their resignation is not merely nominal but is fully processed and effective well before the stipulated deadlines for party primaries.

For legal practitioners, this case highlights the dual nature of legal compliance in political contests. While advocating for electoral integrity, attorneys must also be acutely aware of the robust and increasingly enforced data protection regime under the NDPA 2023. The unauthorized disclosure of personal information, even with the intention of exposing alleged wrongdoing, carries significant legal risks, including administrative sanctions and civil liabilities. Lawyers advising political clients should counsel against self-help measures that infringe on privacy rights and instead guide them towards lawful avenues for challenging eligibility, such as official petitions to party committees or electoral tribunals. The incident further signals the NDPC's potential role in mediating or adjudicating data privacy breaches arising from political activities, marking a new frontier in Nigerian legal practice.