The Executive Director of Yiaga Africa, Samson Itodo, has clarified that Sections 77(7) and 85 of Nigeria's 2026 Electoral Act do not conflict. According to him, these provisions regulate different aspects of the electoral process. Itodo made this statement in response to claims that Section 77(7) contradicted Section 85. He emphasized that the argument was an attempt to stretch legislative intent to justify partisan positions.
Section 85 of the Electoral Act prohibits political parties from imposing eligibility, qualification, or disqualification criteria beyond those prescribed by the 1999 Constitution, as amended. On the other hand, Section 77(7) provides consequences for a political party that fails to submit its membership register within the stipulated period. Itodo highlighted that the distinction between these provisions is critical, as they regulate different aspects of the electoral process.
Itodo explained that Section 85 regulates what political parties can demand of aspirants, while Section 77(7) regulates what the law requires political parties to do. He noted that a political party could comply fully with Section 85 and still fall foul of Section 77(7). This is because the two provisions impose separate obligations on political parties. Itodo emphasized that conceptual tension between the two provisions does not necessarily mean they are in conflict.
According to Itodo, the critical distinction lies between a candidate's eligibility and a political party's compliance with the statutory nomination process. He noted that an aspirant could be fully qualified to contest an election, yet the political party seeking to sponsor the aspirant could be legally incapable of doing so due to non-compliance with the statutory nomination process. In such cases, the aspirant's qualification remains intact, but the party's capacity to sponsor is compromised.
Itodo cautioned against interpreting electoral provisions in a manner that accommodates partisan interests. He argued that the provisions should be assessed according to their distinct legal purposes and the obligations they impose. Itodo emphasized that legal interpretation should not be stretched to accommodate partisan convenience. Instead, the focus should be on understanding the provisions' distinct legal purposes.
The clarification by Itodo comes amid concerns about the interpretation and implementation of Nigeria's Electoral Act. The Act aims to ensure the integrity and transparency of the electoral process. Itodo's statement provides insight into the nuances of the provisions and their implications for political parties and aspirants. His clarification is expected to guide stakeholders in the electoral process.
Ultimately, Itodo's statement emphasizes the need for a clear understanding of Nigeria's Electoral Act provisions. By dismissing claims of conflict between Sections 77(7) and 85, he has provided clarity on the regulatory framework governing the electoral process. This clarification is crucial for ensuring that political parties and aspirants comply with the law and that the electoral process is conducted in a fair and transparent manner.
Key points
- Samson Itodo clarifies that Sections 77(7) and 85 of Nigeria's Electoral Act regulate different aspects of the electoral process.
