2026 and the challenges before INEC

Correspondent TONY AKOWE examines the challenges that will face the Independent National Commission (INEC) during the off-cycle Ekiti and Osun States governorship polls and the 2027 general election

Many challenges will confront the National Electoral Commission (INEC) ahead of the off-cycle Ekiti and Osun governorship and the 2027 general election. While the political parties and their members will be jostling for space in the 2027 elections, the Commission will be busy with several activities that will culminate in the conduct of the exercise. It is significant to say that the year 2026 represents one of the most demanding periods for Nigeria’s electoral umpire. Starting with the resumption of the continuous voter registration to the conduct of the FCT Area Council elections to the conduct of the off-cycle governorship elections in Ekiti and Osun States as well as a few legislative by-elections, INEC has a huge work load laced with serious challenges which must be surmounted to give Nigerians a credible election in 2027. In view of the task ahead of the commission, it must be prepared to carry out massive and early groundwork required for the 2027 general elections. From voter registration centres to polling units in remote communities, from courtrooms flooded with post-election litigation to public debates over technology and transparency, INEC’s actions this year will shape not just individual election outcomes but public confidence in Nigeria’s democratic future.

One of the major challenges that the commission must deal with in 2026 ahead of the general election is the issue of mass mobilization of Nigerians to actively participate in the voter registration exercise, across the states. While the rate of participation of eligible voters has been very encouraging, the participation in some other states have been abysmally low and this has been attributed to low level of public trust. Many see the exercise as just a means to an end as the false narrative has often gone out that you can use it for employment purpose rather than a civic responsibility. Ahead of the general election, the commission has the huge task of working with the National Orientation Agency to carry out series of voter education beginning with the CVR.  For an institution still grappling with controversies from past elections, the coming months will not merely be routine, but a stress test of institutional resilience, technological reliability and democratic commitment.

Voter registration remains a foundational challenge with far-reaching implications for electoral legitimacy. In 2026, INEC will face pressure to expand access while maintaining the integrity of the voter register. Persistent issues such as multiple registrations, outdated records, and under-registration in rural or conflict-affected areas risk distorting voter representation and creating perceptions of exclusion or bias. There is therefore the need for a constant clean-up of the voter register to remove dead persons and underage. Even though the law provide for the time frame for the voter registration, the commission may need to end the ongoing exercise early enough to allow for a clean-up for the purpose of adequate planning for the 2027 elections. This is so because demographic changes pose serious challenge, particularly the surge in first-time and young voters. If registration processes are slow, inaccessible, or poorly communicated, large segments of the population may remain disenfranchised. This could deepen political apathy which the commission is already grappling with. If this is allowed to happen, the trust gap between citizens and electoral institutions may widen, especially among younger voters who are already skeptical about the political system. Also, the commission must work hard to enhance the credibility of the voter register which is closely linked to post-election stability. Disputes over inflated figures, ghost voters, or regional imbalances often form the basis of election petitions. Failure to address registration challenges proactively may therefore increase litigation, delay election outcomes, and undermine confidence in the entire democratic process. In addition to this, there may be need for the commission to create new polling units, while depopulating large units. The INEC guidelines provide for a maximum of 500 voters per polling unit for easy management and a way of ensuring large participation. But currently, several polling units have close to 1500 voters, making easy participation difficult and elections running into the night.

The FCT Area Council is the first elections to be conducted by the commission in 2026 and the second under the current chairman of the commission. Although it is directly under the FCT state office of the Commission where logistics and other arrangements are to be made, it will no doubt have its own impact on the general atmosphere in the commission. That explain why the entire commission will be involved in the conduct. While the commission can boast of successful outing during the Anambra elections, preparation for that were largely done by the Mahmood Yakubu led leadership. Tongues are already wagging following the exclusion of the Labour Party from the contest following the judgement of the Supreme Court which nullified the Abure led National Working Commission and by extension of all actions taken thereafter.  But as at the time of this report, INEC still recognizes Abure on its data base as the Chairman of the party. The guideline for uploading candidates on the INEC nomination portal provides that the commission issue an access code to the leadership of the party as contained in its data base.

Like the Labour Party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) is enmeshed in crisis leading to the exclusion of the party from the list of candidates for the Ekiti off cycle governorship election. The crisis in the party and some others will no doubt pose serious challenges to the commission ahead of the general election, especially as the courts continue to give conflicting verdicts which the commission will be expected to obey leading to the elections. The commission must also be able to deal with the issue of upload of names and particulars of candidates for the elections. They must take a definite position, which must be backed by law on the modality for uploading the names of candidates. The PDP has argued that since the commission issued it with an access code for the Ekiti elections, there was no basis blocking the party from submitting the names. The question then is, does submitting the forms manually and the commission acknowledging receipt amount to submission in line with the guidelines? The commission must deal with this challenge going forward with a view to avoiding needless legal battles which parties often bring to bear on the commission. Beyond that, one question that has continued to agitate the mind of Nigerians is whether the Supreme Court decision on the crisis in the Labour party which as replicated in the case of the Social Democratic Party. The former Chairman of the Commission, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu has often said that one of the biggest challenges of the commission is the deluge of cases which the commission is made party to and which often draw back the hands of the commission.

One other challenge the commission will grapple with is the legal issues surrounding the conduct of elections. The 2022 Electoral Act left so much to be chance, and placed the commission in a disadvantaged position. The defects should be corrected in the 2025 electoral act which is yet to be passed by the National Assembly. For example, the law does not give any legal backing to the use of the BVAS machine, even though it is taken care of by the guidelines drawn up by the commission and given recognition by the Supreme Court.

In one of his public engagement, INEC Chairman, Prof. Joash Amupitan spoke of the fact that technology plays a critical role in the electoral process, but admitted that network challenges remain a critical challenge. However, it must be said that the growing dependence on electoral technology places INEC at the center of heightened public scrutiny ahead of 2026, especially after the technical glitches that affected the upload of Presidential election results to the INEC Election Viewing portal (IREV) during the 2023 presidential election. That glitch alone affected the credibility of the election results.  Interestingly, tools like the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System, otherwise known as BVAS which serves as technology for electronic voter accreditation, and result transmission is now perceived as the backbone of electoral credibility. Therefore, any malfunction, delay, or inconsistency, whether caused by technical failure, human error or sabotage could quickly escalate into allegations of electoral manipulation. It therefore raises the stakes for system reliability and therefore exposes the commission to reputational damage even when failures are localized. Beyond the hardware and software issues, the technical capacity of election officials remain a significant challenge and the commission must rise up to the occasion aside from working closely with network providers. It is instructive to say that many ad-hoc staff operate under time pressure with limited technical expertise, increasing the likelihood of misuse the devices or causing breakdown on election-day while The Electoral Institute, the training arm of the Commission often carry out adhoc training for electoral officers, this may not be adequate given the level of literacy of some of those involved because inadequate training and uneven digital literacy across regions could lead to inconsistent application of technology, creating disparities that undermine the principle of equal suffrage and fuel post-election grievances.

In an era of advances in cyber security, threats arising from such have the potentials to further compound the technological challenge because as electoral systems become more digitized, they become more attractive targets for hacking, data breaches, and disinformation campaigns. Unsubstantiated claims of cyber interference could weaken public trust and so, INEC must therefore balance transparency with security, ensuring that systems are verifiable, resilient, and auditable without exposing them to undue risk. There is also the need for the commission to build a water tight system that will be difficult to penetrate given the insinuations that hackers tried to break into the system during the 2023 general elections.

In the process of election management, INEC’s logistical operations represent one of the most complex undertakings in nation’s democratic process. This involved the movement of sensitive and non-sensitive materials from across the country supposedly under tight timelines. But this has often created multiple points of vulnerability especially in the movement from state capitals to the local government headquarters and then to the polling units. Majority of these movement has in the recent times been handled by commercial vehicles, under an arrangement between the commission and the drivers unions. Traversing difficult terrains in some parts of the country, there has often been reported delay in deployment of these materials or missing materials leading to late commencement of voting in some areas. This has the ability to disenfranchise voters and cast doubt on the credibility of affected polling units. Observer believe that security and infrastructure deficits further complicate logistics. Poor road networks, fuel scarcity, insecurity, and adverse weather conditions can disrupt transportation plans, particularly in remote or volatile areas. These challenges often force last-minute improvisation, increasing costs and reducing operational efficiency while exposing INEC to accusations of incompetence or bias.

The management of the electoral body has often complained about the effect of fake news and misinformation on the electoral process. The spread of fake news no doubt poses a serious threat to electoral integrity in the country. More often than not, there have been false information about voter suppression, rigging, or result manipulation circulate widely and fast especially on social media, outpacing INEC’s ability to respond. In most cases, such false narratives have shaped public perception long before official clarification is issued, damaging trust regardless of the facts. The commission must therefore restrategise and put in place a quick response mechanism as a way of combating false and fake news especially on election days. The delays in responding to issues in the electoral space is largely responsible to why Nigerians believe that the glitch that affected the 2023 presidential election upload was not real. This same principle must be applied dealing with issues of misinformation which has the potential to incite violence and voter apathy. Rumors about attacks on polling units, pre-determined outcomes, or doctored results may discourage voter turnout or provoke unrest. INEC’s silence or delayed response in such situations may be interpreted as confirmation, thereby further escalating tensions.

While addressing fake news places INEC in a delicate position, there must be an aggressive countermeasures to handle fake news. The challenge lies in developing credible, timely, and transparent communication strategies that reinforce public trust without undermining freedom of expression.

 Political Party Monitoring

Advertisement

2026 poses a great challenge to INEC in terms of the monitoring the activities of political parties as provided for by the laws of the land. The registration and monitoring of the activities of political parties is one of the constitutional role of the commission. To take away this role from INEC, the National Assembly had proposed an amendment to the constitution to create a separate commission that will take charge of this responsibility. But in the absence of that commission, INEC must play that role which is critical to an effective election. So, INEC’s constitutional role in monitoring political party activities presents significant institutional and political challenges, especially in an election year where parties are expected to conduct party primaries to nominate candidates for elective positions. Interestingly, all party primaries for the Presidential, governorship legislative elections are to be conducted in 2026 and the commission is expected to be privy to and monitor these primaries.  Interestingly, the commission has expressed concern about early campaigns by political parties and political actors with the commission acting helpless in dealing with the situation. Going against the established electoral protocols is a major challenge which can only be dealt with through appropriate legal sanctions. Unfortunately, there appear not to be a specific provisions that grant the electoral umpire specific powers to deal with violators. INEC must rise to the occasion and ensure strict compliance with established electoral protocols in the countdown to the general elections.

One area that has been neglected is party membership before party primaries and the electoral act 2022 and the constitution has not made specific provisions that allow opposing parties complain about emergency waivers granted to intending aspirants by political parties even though the electoral act makes it mandatory that anybody whose name does not appear in the membership register 30 days before the party primaries is not eligible to run for the election. Also, political parties has always fragrantly violated the provisions requiring compliance with campaign finance regulations, codes of conduct, and internal democratic principles requires robust oversight mechanisms that INEC currently struggles to fully enforce this provisions. Weak monitoring allows impunity, undermining the rule of law within the party system.

Both the commission and political parties have often complain about lack of internal democracy among the political parties leading the members jumping ship at the last minute and complicating preparation for the commission. The lack of internal democracy in many parties no doubt has broader electoral implications. Candidate imposition, exclusion of stakeholders, and outdated decision-making has often trigger internal conflicts that spill into the general election. When INEC is perceived as unable or unwilling to enforce standards, public confidence in the fairness of the electoral process declines. This is why the commission must ensure effective party monitoring ahead of the general election because it is critical to reducing electoral violence and vote-buying. Sanctions must be brought to bear in offenders because failure to sanction erring parties and their stakeholders normalizes electoral malpractice and weakens political competition.

Party Primaries

By the provisions of the electoral act 2022, which provides announcement of a date for election for 360 days before elections, see INEC is expected to release the table of activities for the 2027 general elections before the of February, 2026. The timetable is expected to set timelines for party primaries and other activities leading to the elections. Interestingly, party primaries remain one of the most problematic stages of the electoral process as poorly conducted primaries characterized by violence, exclusion, and parallel congresses create legitimacy crises before the general election even begins. INEC’s limited legal power at enforcement often leave the commission with having to manage the outcome of such primaries rather than preventing the problems. It is on record that disputed primaries have been the major driver of pre-election litigation, with candidates frequently challenge party processes, leading to court-ordered substitutions and uncertainty over valid nominees. These disruptions complicate ballot preparation and voter education, increasing the risk of errors and confusion. This explain why there has often been complaints of omission of names of candidates and their party during elections. However, the overall impact of flawed primaries is a weakened democratic culture because when candidates emerge through undemocratic means, accountability to voters diminishes. So, if party primaries are not reformed and effectively monitored ahead of the general elections, the credibility of the entire electoral cycle will remain under sustained pressure.

Ekiti and Osun election

The Ekiti and Osun state governorship election will no doubt be a litmus test for the commission. It will be an opportunity for the commission to address issues of electoral integrity that has plagued the nation’s electoral system. It will be the first major opportunity for the Prof. Amupitan leadership to fully organize a full-fledged election, having inherited the preparation for the Anambra election from Prof. Yakubu. Already, the commission is facing allegations of bias from the Tanimu Turaki led leadership of the Peoples Democratic Party for not including the name of its governorship candidate among those displayed for the Ekiti election. How the commission handle the issue will have either positive or negative impact on the conduct of the election. Expectation from the commission are high as far as the two election are concerned. Some of the technological devices that will be used for the 2027 elections will first be used during the two off cycle election to allow for fine tuning where necessary. Ekiti and Osun are not just any states. They are politically sophisticated, highly competitive, and historically prone to intense electoral contests. Both states have seen elections overturned in the past with prolonged court battles, allegations of vote-buying and heavy security presence. Incidentally, Ekiti State for example has built a reputation as one of the country’s most politically competitive states, with the governorship elections often decided by razor-thin margins, with voting patterns influenced by local networks, political godfathers and a highly vocal electorate. The state, which is the first of the two off cycle elections presents several challenges for the commission. Although not restricted to the state, incidences of vote-buying has become increasingly sophisticated, shifting from open cash distribution to discreet electronic transfers and inducements before election-day. Security deployment is delicate. Heavy security presence is often criticised as voter intimidation, while light deployment risks election-day disruptions. Logistics, especially in riverine and rural communities remain a major concern, especially where bad roads and network coverage affect BVAS functionality and result transmission. In view of this, civil society observers have always warned that Ekiti elections is a major litmus test for whether INEC can curb monetisation of votes without disenfranchising voters.

Also, the political climate in Osun state has always remained tense following previous legal battles over governorship outcomes. The state has no doubt witnessed deep partisan divisions, with supporters of major parties quick to dispute outcomes of elections. Even though the former governor and Minister of Marine and Blue Economy is not participating in the election, it is expected that there will still be high judicial scrutiny, meaning even minor procedural errors could invalidate results. There will also be public scepticism, as voters increasingly question whether their votes will translate into real outcomes. For INEC, Osun demands not just efficiency but meticulous compliance with the Electoral Act, because the margin for error is slim and litigation almost guaranteed. The question is whether the Ekiti scenario will play out for the PDP and whether they will have access to the access code to upload the name and particulars of their candidate.

Composition of the Commission

By law, the body known as the Commission is made up of the Chairman and 12 National Commissioners. The body should ideally be complete when conducting major elections. However, the commission may be faced with either an incomplete commission or forced to work with some that lack the basic experience in election management. From available records, five National Commissioners inaugurated between September and October 2021 will exit the commission after five years as provided by law. These are Prof Sani Adams, Prof. Abdullahi AbdulZuru and Dr Baba Bila who sworn in September 2021, as well as Prof. Kunle Ajayi and Prof Sani Kallah sworn in October 2021. They will be expected to exit the commission after their five year term in September and October 2026. Similarly, four other National Commissioners sworn in February 2022 would have spent five years by February 2027 when the elections would have commenced and also expected to exit the commission. They are Mohammed Haruna, May Abamuche-Mbu, Sam Olumekun and Rhoda Gumus. Another National Commissioner, Major General Moddibo Alkali died in April 2025 and is yet to be replaced. The exit of these National Commissioners will place the Commission at a disadvantaged position. Also, Secretary to the Commission, Mrs. Rose Oriaran- Anthony will be completing her eight year tenure as Secretary to the Commission having been appointed for the first four years in 2018 and reappointed in December 2022. While the law makes provision for the appointment of an acting secretary to the commission, there is no provision for the appointment of acting National Commissioners. While some of these commissioners have the opportunity of being reappointed, others are completing their second terms as National Commissioners and would need to be replaced outrightly.