Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Magaji Mato, has mentioned Nigeria’s electoral umpire, the Impartial Nationwide Electoral Fee (INEC), can’t forestall dissatisfied candidates from difficult election outcomes in court docket, even when elections are performed credibly.
Talking in an interview on ARISE Information on Wednesday, Mato harassed that the inevitability of electoral litigation lies not solely within the conduct of elections but additionally within the reactions of political actors and the general public.
“If those that contested the elections usually are not snug, regardless that INEC in its personal understanding has performed free and truthful elections, the INEC can’t cease them from going to court docket to problem the election.”
Mato defined that the difficulty of post-election disputes goes past institutional efficiency and is essentially formed by notion and acceptance of outcomes by contestants.
“What determines a free and truthful election is what Nigerians themselves understand.”
He famous that even when INEC fulfils its mandate to conduct credible polls, aggrieved candidates should still reject outcomes and pursue authorized redress.
“We even have a state of affairs the place, you see, Nigerians usually are not at all times keen and able to settle for defeats in electoral processes.”
The senior lawyer made the remarks whereas reacting to the federal authorities’s proposed ₦135.22 billion allocation within the 2026 finances for electoral adjudication and post-election bills, which has drawn criticism from opposition events and civil society {groups}.
Mato, nonetheless, cautioned in opposition to deciphering the allocation as funds earmarked solely for authorized charges, stating that the finances doubtless covers a variety of election-related bills.
“I don’t wish to take the place that that amount of cash was put aside to pay legal professionals by the federal authorities.”
He added that election-related spending extends past litigation to incorporate logistics, safety, and the participation of each native and worldwide observers.
“There are civic societies that can come to look at elections. There are international our bodies that can come to look at elections. There are additionally safety personnel that will probably be given allowances for particular duties right here and there. And there are different logistics that will probably be supplied.”
On the position of INEC in electoral disputes, Mato famous that the fee is sort of at all times a celebration in election litigation, making it tough to foretell or restrict the quantity of instances.
“You can not rely the variety of lawsuits that will probably be filed that INEC will probably be making, as a result of there’s just about no motion that goes to court docket with out becoming a member of INEC.”
He described the proposed finances as a “workable” provision, given the size and complexity of Nigeria’s electoral system.
“So these actions are multidimensional. And if they’ve this cash, it’s in all probability not for them to spend all the cash. I’m not their spokesman. However I really feel it is a finances, a workable finances.”
Mato additionally addressed considerations about transparency, significantly the position of the funds beneath service-wide votes quite than being instantly allotted to INEC. He emphasised the significance of due course of in authorities spending.
“Each bills of the federal government should undergo appropriation course of.”
He warned that any deviation from established appropriation procedures raises accountability questions for the Nationwide Meeting.
“If it’s not finished so, then it’s left for the Nationwide Meeting to clarify throughout the capacities they’ve as to the place they bought the ability to acceptable or to allocate this amount of cash.”
On lowering post-election disputes, Mato acknowledged that whereas INEC should attempt for transparency, litigation might persist as a consequence of broader authorized and political components.
“Let the general public see that you’ve got finished all within the bit to make sure… that it’s also transparently proven that it’s free and truthful.”
He famous that courts finally play a decisive position in figuring out election outcomes, typically on technical grounds past the preliminary conduct of polls.
“You will have the courts who additionally take a look at different facets, possibly technical facets, possibly another authorized points that in all probability the winner will in any other case change into the loser.”
Faridah Abdulkadiri
Times Nigeria