Electoral Act 2026 And The Future Of Party Primaries In Nigeria

This shift significantly reshapes the internal workings of political parties and will influence how candidates emerge ahead of future elections.

Under the new framework, any political party that intends to field a candidate must conduct a Primary election. The process must be observed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Even where a Party adopts consensus, the law still requires a formal Primary event. The purpose is straightforward: candidate selection should not happen entirely behind closed doors.

Direct Primaries allow all registered members of a Party to vote for their preferred candidate. Consensus Primaries, on the other hand, depend on aspirants agreeing among themselves to step down in favour of one candidate. For this arrangement to be valid, Party leaders must consult all aspirants and determine whether they are willing to support a single individual. The law is clear that consensus cannot be imposed. If any aspirant refuses to withdraw, the Party must revert to direct Primaries.

Where consensus is achieved, other aspirants are expected to withdraw voluntarily, usually through written letters confirming their decision. These withdrawals are then recorded by the party. Thereafter, the Party still convenes a primary event where members affirm the agreed candidate through endorsement or voice vote, while Observers from the electoral Commission confirm that the process actually took place.

Another safeguard introduced by the Act is the requirement that Political Parties maintain a digital register of their members and submit it to the electoral Commission at least twenty-one days before primaries. The intention is to ensure that only legitimate Party members participate in direct primaries. Failure to comply with this requirement could prevent a Party from presenting candidates for an election.

Following the Primary process, Parties must submit the names of their candidates to the electoral commission not later than one hundred and twenty days before the election. This timeline is meant to give the Commission sufficient time to review submissions and prepare for the election.

Supporters of the reform argue that removing delegate-based indirect primaries could help reduce the culture of vote buying and other malpractices that often characterized Party conventions. By widening participation to ordinary Party members, the law attempts to strengthen internal party democracy.

Still, the reforms raise a number of important concerns.

Consensus Primaries, for example, can easily become a tool for elite control if they are not handled transparently. In principle, all aspirants must freely agree to the arrangement. In reality, Party leaders may sometimes announce a consensus candidate before genuine consultations take place. Aspirants may then face pressure to withdraw through political bargaining or inducements. Once these withdrawals are documented as voluntary, proving otherwise becomes difficult.

Another concern relates to the verification of Party membership registers. While the law requires digital records, the mechanisms for independently verifying those records remain unclear. Party officials could manipulate membership lists by including loyal supporters or excluding perceived opponents. Without credible verification, direct Primaries may still reflect the influence of internal power brokers rather than the true will of party members.

There is also the broader question of oversight. The electoral Commission is mandated to observe Party Primaries, but observation alone may not always be enough. Many key decisions, including zoning arrangements and negotiations among aspirants, often take place long before the formal Primary event and outside the view of regulators.

This makes it necessary for the electoral Commission to issue clear regulations and guidelines that explain how the new provisions should work in practice.

Stronger observation procedures will be needed to ensure that consultations leading to consensus are genuine, membership registers are credible, and Primary events comply with the standards required under the law.

At the same time, the responsibility for safeguarding the integrity of Party Primaries does not rest with the electoral Commission alone. Civil society organizations and citizens also have an important role to play. Independent civic groups can help promote transparency by observing Primary processes, documenting irregularities, and providing public information about how Parties conduct their internal elections.

Citizens, especially registered Party members, must also insist on their right to participate in credible Primaries and resist attempts to sideline them. In many democracies, the credibility of elections is closely linked to the openness of internal party processes.

As a former Chairman of the electoral Commission once noted, “The credibility of elections begins with the credibility of party primaries.” That observation captures a fundamental truth about democratic governance.

The late Kofi Annan made a similar point when he remarked that “democracy is not just about elections, but about how political competition is organized.”

Internal Party democracy therefore matters just as much as the general election itself.

The Electoral Act 2026 represents an avowed deliberate attempt to strengthen transparency within Nigeria’s electoral system. But laws alone do not guarantee credible outcomes. Their effectiveness depends on how faithfully they are implemented and how actively citizens and civic institutions demand accountability.

As Nigeria approaches another electoral cycle, the focus should not be limited to what happens on election day. Attention must also be directed to the internal processes that determine who appears on the ballot in the first place.

If the provisions of the Electoral Act are supported by clear regulations, responsible conduct by Political Parties, active civic engagement, mandate protection, and firm oversight by the electoral commission, the reforms could help improve the quality of political competition in Nigeria. If not, familiar patterns of manipulation may simply reappear under a new legal framework.