Society is dynamic, serving as a catalyst for constant, frequent, and rapid changes that occur daily. Law, which regulates the behavior of people and the institutions that serve them, must therefore evolve in tandem with these changes so that society does not outpace the law. Among such institutions are political parties, which act as recruitment grounds for those who aspire to lead and ultimately head government—the general regulator of society.
Where there is no law, society regresses, as people begin to behave in ways characteristic of a community without regulation. In this regard, political parties, being composed of human beings, must themselves be regulated. Without such regulation, the natural instinct of human beings in an unregulated environment could turn them into lawless entities. Indeed, the propensity of human beings to disregard due process has transformed political parties into something less than orderly institutions. Consequently, members often challenge infractions committed by party leaders or managers in court, which can disrupt the internal administration of political parties.
Traditionally, courts have been reluctant to interfere in the internal affairs of political parties, recognizing that excessive judicial intrusion could itself become a recipe for disorder. Yet, the absence of any provision in earlier Electoral Acts empowering the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to intervene in party administration often gave rise to endless litigation that dogged political parties.
For the first time in the country’s history, however, the Electoral Act 2026, Section 83(1), explicitly strengthens INEC’s authority. The section provides that:
“The Commission shall have the power to regulate, monitor, and enforce compliance by political parties with their constitutions, guidelines, rules, and regulations, and may issue directives to ensure internal democracy and accountability within such parties.”
This provision is groundbreaking. It empowers INEC not merely to oversee elections but to act as a watchdog over the internal workings of political parties. By invoking Section 83(1), INEC can:
* Checkmate wayward leaders by ensuring that party constitutions and rules are strictly followed.
* Issue binding directives to prevent arbitrary decisions, such as imposition of candidates or disregard for internal democratic processes.
*Sanction parties or leaders who flout their own rules, thereby discouraging impunity.
* Reduce disruptive litigation by providing an administrative mechanism for resolving disputes before they escalate to the courts.
Promote accountability and transparency, ensuring that party leadership reflects democratic values rather than personal whims.
The Dynamism of Section 83 Subsections (1–5):
The innovations introduced by Section 83 go beyond subsection (1). Collectively, subsections (1–5) reshape the balance between party autonomy, INEC oversight, and judicial restraint:
Subsection (1): Grants INEC direct powers to regulate, monitor, and enforce compliance with party constitutions and rules.
Subsection (2): Empowers INEC to conduct inquiries into party activities, ensuring transparency and accountability.
Subsection (3): Authorizes INEC to direct its inquiries to party officials at all levels—national, state, local government, area council, or ward—thus decentralizing oversight and preventing concentration of power. Subsection (4): Provides INEC with authority to issue directives that are binding, ensuring that its regulatory role is not merely advisory but enforceable.
Subsection (5): Removes judicial interference by stipulating that “no Court in Nigeria shall entertain jurisdiction over any suit or matter pertaining to the internal affairs of a political party.” Where such suits are filed, courts are barred from granting interim injunctions and must instead deliver rulings only at final judgment, with accelerated hearing.
Conclusion:
Taken together, Section 83 subsections (1–5) introduce a new dynamism into Nigeria’s political and legal landscape. They shift the locus of control from endless litigation to administrative oversight, empowering INEC to act as both regulator and stabilizer of party democracy. By curbing judicial intrusion while strengthening INEC’s supervisory role, the Act ensures that political parties remain accountable, orderly, and aligned with democratic principles. Ultimately, this framework safeguards the rule of law and prevents political parties from degenerating into lawless entities, thereby fortifying the foundations of Nigeria’s democracy.
Leave a comment