The House of Representatives yesterday increased campaign spending limits for candidates contesting elective offices, raising the maximum presidential campaign expenditure from N5 billion to N10 billion; and governorship’s, from N1 billion to N3 billion.
It also passed an amendment mandating the real-time electronic transmission of election results by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
These were part of the passage of the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill 2025, following clause-by-clause consideration of the report of the House Committee on Electoral Matters, chaired by Adebayo Balogun.
Under the approved Clause 93(2), spending limits for National Assembly candidates were also increased, with senatorial candidates now allowed to spend up to N500 million, up from N100 million; and House of Representatives candidates, N250 million from the previous N70 million.
For state constituencies, the campaign expense ceiling was raised from N30 million to N100 million; chairmanship candidates, from N30 million to N60 million; councillorship candidates, N10 million from N5 million.
The House also approved a provision restricting individual or corporate donations to a maximum of N500 million per candidate.
Democracy no longer for the masses – Political experts
Speaking on the issue, a political scientist Prof. Gbade Ojo, said the rising cost of politics has fundamentally altered the nature of Nigeria’s democracy.
“By this development, the implication is that our democracy is no longer for the masses. It is no longer a government of the people, by the people and for the people. What we now have is a government of the rich, by the rich and for the rich”, he said.
Ojo noted that the situation systematically shuts competent public servants out of the political space.
“No public servant retires with the hope of contesting. Not a vice chancellor of a university. Not even a career ambassador. This denies the state the services of experienced and highly trained individuals who have been developed and retrained over the course of their professional lives,” he said.
He further raised concerns about campaign finance monitoring, asking, “Does the electoral management body have the machinery to track campaign expenditure? The answer is no. Unlike in developed societies where campaign spending can be monitored through newspaper advertisements, hotel bills, fuel consumption, radio and television airtime, such scrutiny is almost impossible here. What we claim to have is largely a self-delusion.”
According to Ojo, the development will breed a non-inclusive democracy that entrenches social stratification between the haves and the have nots.
“Those currently in government, whether in the Senate or the executive, feel compelled to amass wealth simply to survive the next election cycle. It is unfortunate that our democracy has descended to this level”, he added.
On the potential impact on future elections, Ojo warned that the masses would continue to withdraw from the political space.
“From 1999 to date, the gap between registered voters and actual voters has continued to widen. In the 2023 election, over 90 million Nigerians were reportedly registered, yet barely over 30 million voted. This represents a massive disengagement from democratic participation.”
He cautioned that “what emerges from this trend is a government that belongs to them, not to us. Such a government inevitably suffers from a legitimacy crisis, which is dangerous for democratic sustenance and consolidation.”
Ojo also predicted a worsening of vote buying. “With politicians able to deploy even larger sums of money, the inducement of voters becomes easier and more entrenched. Money will increasingly determine outcomes, further eroding the integrity of the electoral process,” he said.
On his part, the Head of the Department of Political Science at the University of Ilorin, Dr Edun Abdulkareem, described it as dangerous to democracy
He said: “It is not individual candidacy that generates this level of money. The real issue lies with political parties and their members. Candidates are expected to finance party supporters and loyalists, creating the impression that an individual must personally generate enormous resources to contest elections is wrong.”
He questioned the logic of the escalating costs.
Abdulkareem said the current trend promotes a “dangerous form of political development where public office becomes an investment venture. People contest elections not to serve, but to monetise policies, recoup investments and make returns. Those who invest heavily in politics must find ways to recover their money once they get into office. This is the foundation of systemic corruption.
“Those who cannot afford to participate are forced to step back. Communities that once had a stake in the political process are gradually excluded. Democracy becomes the preserve of a few, while the majority is reduced to spectators. This creates deep social, political, legal, and moral divisions within society.”
“Vote buying will increase. It may not take the same form as before, but it will be more sophisticated and more entrenched. The process will be driven by economic hardship and sustained by a political system that rewards money over merit.”
Vanguard
