Nigeria, April 10, 2026
The Resource Centre for Human Rights and Civic Education (CHRICED) has strongly criticised the Federal Government’s proposed allocation of ₦135.22 billion for anticipated election litigations ahead of the 2027 general elections, describing it as alarming and a threat to Nigeria’s democratic credibility.
In a statement issued on April 10, 2026, and signed by its Executive Director, Ibrahim M. Zikirullahi, the organisation warned that the budgetary provision signals a troubling shift in the country’s electoral priorities, raising concerns about transparency, accountability, and trust in democratic institutions.
The group noted that the Federal Government has already proposed ₦873.78 billion for the 2027 general elections, alongside an additional ₦171 billion earmarked for the operations of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) in 2026.
However, it described as “deeply troubling” the inclusion of a ₦135.22 billion allocation—representing 15.48 percent of the total election budget—dedicated solely to election-related litigation.
According to CHRICED, the litigation fund, reportedly embedded within the Service Wide Votes, appeared suddenly in the revised 2026 budget without prior disclosure, raising serious concerns about transparency and intent.
The organisation stressed that the absence of clear guidelines on how the funds would be utilised further undermines public confidence in the electoral process.
The group argued that INEC already operates legal departments across all 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory to manage electoral disputes, making the additional allocation excessive and indicative of an expectation of widespread electoral conflict rather than a commitment to credible elections.
CHRICED questioned whether the government is preparing for credible polls or “budgeting for electoral chaos,” warning that such heavy financial emphasis on litigation suggests a growing reliance on the judiciary to determine electoral outcomes instead of voters.
The organisation further described the allocation as insensitive, especially amid prevailing economic challenges, including rising inflation, unemployment, poverty, and public debt.
It maintained that dedicating such a significant sum to potential electoral disputes reflects poor prioritisation and a governance approach that accommodates systemic inefficiencies instead of addressing them.
It warned that the development could further erode already fragile public trust in democratic institutions, fuel voter apathy, and weaken the legitimacy of future elections.
CHRICED emphasised that in functional democracies, elections are decided at polling units rather than in courtrooms, cautioning that preparing financially for large-scale litigation sends the wrong signal about the integrity of the electoral system.
The organisation advocated a shift in focus toward preventive electoral reforms, including voter education, improved logistics, adoption of reliable technology, transparent result management, and enhanced training for electoral personnel.
It argued that such investments would significantly reduce disputes and strengthen electoral credibility.
CHRICED also highlighted the opportunity cost of the ₦135.22 billion allocation, noting that the funds could instead be channelled into critical sectors such as healthcare, education, agriculture, security, and power, where they would have a more direct impact on citizens’ welfare.
The group called on the Federal Government to provide full disclosure and justification for the litigation budget, including clear oversight mechanisms, while urging a reprioritisation of electoral spending toward reforms that enhance transparency and efficiency.
It also stressed the need to strengthen INEC’s independence and reduce reliance on post-election litigation by ensuring that electoral outcomes reflect the will of the people.
Reaffirming its position, CHRICED concluded that Nigeria must move away from what it described as the institutionalisation of electoral dysfunction, insisting that the credibility of elections must be safeguarded at the source rather than contested in courtrooms after the process.
