The removal of certificate forgery as a ground for filing election petitions in the newly amended Electoral Act 2026 has sparked widespread criticism from legal experts, political analysts and key stakeholders, who warn that the provision could weaken democracy.
BusinessDay reports that Section 138 of the Electoral Act 2026 outlines the grounds upon which an election may be challenged, but no longer includes certificate forgery among them.
Section 138(1) of the Act states that an election may only be questioned on the grounds that the election was invalid due to corrupt practices or non-compliance with the provisions of the Act, or that the respondent was not duly elected by a majority of lawful votes cast.
The law further stipulates that acts or omissions that merely contradict instructions or directives of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), but do not violate the Act itself, cannot serve as grounds for questioning an election.
In addition, Section 138(3) imposes strict penalties where election petitions are filed on grounds outside those recognised by the Act. The court is required to impose fines of not less than N5 million on counsel and not less than N10 million on the petitioner.
Section 139 of the Act also provides that an election shall not be invalidated on the basis of non-compliance with the law if the tribunal or court determines that the election was conducted substantially in accordance with the principles of the Act and that the alleged non-compliance did not significantly affect the outcome of the election.
But the amendment has drawn sharp criticism from Jibrin Okutepa, Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), who questioned the legality and moral implications of removing certificate forgery as a basis for challenging election results.
In a statement posted on his official X account, Okutepa described the move as an “outrage” and a troubling attempt by the political class to weaken established standards of accountability.
“This is an outrage, a brazen attempt to redefine a society’s moral code by a morally compromised political class. When criminals rule, the society’s morals are turned upside down,” he said.
The senior lawyer noted that the presentation of forged certificates had historically formed part of the grounds for questioning a candidate’s qualification in election petitions under Nigeria’s electoral jurisprudence.
“Hitherto, the presentation of forged certificates, which forms part of the qualification requirements, had always been a ground for election petitions. But the new Electoral Act 2026 has removed that ground,” he said.
Okutepa argued that the National Assembly may have exceeded its powers because issues relating to qualification for public office are constitutional matters.
According to him, the Constitution clearly outlines the qualifications required for elective offices such as President, Governor and members of the National and State Assemblies, and such provisions cannot be overridden by ordinary legislation.
He further warned that limiting the grounds for election petitions could discourage legitimate legal challenges and shield unqualified candidates from scrutiny.
Also, Aminu Yakudima, a founding member of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), has described the development as a serious setback for Nigeria’s democratic and institutional growth.
In a telephone interview with BusinessDay, Yakudima said the situation reflects a troubling trend that could undermine the country’s progress, particularly in the areas of education, governance and human development.
“This is a very serious retrogressive development. It is not good for a country like Nigeria that is still struggling to develop.
“We are already behind in development, education and human capacity development. If we truly want to grow as a nation, we must place strong emphasis on education, knowledge and experience,” he daid.
Yakudima, who is also a political analyst, stressed that formal education remains essential for building competent leadership and effective democratic institutions.
“Our emphasis should be on formal education, where people are required to go through proper academic processes and obtain certificates that attest to their qualifications,” he added.
Yakudima, a chieftain of the PDP warned that any attempt to downplay the importance of education or tolerate actions that undermine academic standards could harm both the country’s educational system and its democratic foundations.
“Governance is a serious business. Democracy cannot function effectively without capable, knowledgeable and well-educated individuals in leadership positions,” Yakudima said.
“When we uphold laws and standards that emphasise proper education and certification, we are strengthening the country. But if we undermine them, we risk doing serious damage to our institutions and to democracy itself,” he said.
Similarly, Peter Ameh, a politician and former chairman of the Inter-Party Advisory Council (IPAC), has also criticised the development, describing it as a troubling moment for Nigeria’s democracy.
Speaking with BusinessDay in a telephone interview, Ameh, who is also a former national chairman of the defunct Progressives Peoples Alliance (PPA), said the move raises serious concerns about the country’s commitment to education, merit and democratic integrity.
“Why are we sending our children to school? Why are families spending huge amounts of money on education if we are beginning to suggest that academic qualifications no longer matter in public leadership?
“This is a very unfortunate development. The amendment looks like a legislative overreach aimed at favouring the interest of one individual while undermining the integrity and credibility of our electoral process,” he said.
He argued that democratic leadership should be built on competence, knowledge and proven capacity, which are often demonstrated through education and experience.
“In every professional field today, people are required to present certificates and evidence of competence before they are employed. Yet we are lowering the bar for those who want to govern millions of people and make laws for the country,” Ameh said.
The former IPAC chairman warned that weakening standards for public office could erode accountability and reduce the quality of governance.
“Instead of strengthening our laws to promote discipline, transparency and credible participation in governance, we appear to be weakening them. That is not how to deepen democracy,” he added.
Ameh described the development as a setback for Nigeria’s democratic evolution and urged lawmakers to prioritise reforms that strengthen institutions rather than those that create doubts about the country’s commitment to merit and accountability.
However, Bernard Mikko, a political scientist and former member of the House of Representatives from Rivers State, offered a different perspective on the development.
Speaking with BusinessDay in a telephone interview, Mikko said the issue of certificate forgery is already adequately addressed in the Nigerian Constitution, and therefore removing related provisions from the Electoral Act may not significantly change the legal position.
“The Constitution is very clear on the issue of qualifications for elective office, including the presentation of certificates. If you check the relevant sections, the requirements are already stated there,” he said.
According to him, unless the Constitution itself is amended, the fundamental provisions governing eligibility for public office remain intact.
“If such a clause is removed from the Electoral Act, it does not automatically override what is already provided in the Constitution. Any major change would still require a constitutional amendment,” he explained.
Mikko added that if the provision is no longer emphasised in the Electoral Act, the responsibility may increasingly fall on voters to scrutinise the backgrounds and credibility of candidates seeking public office.
“In that situation, the burden shifts more to the integrity of the candidates and the vigilance of the electorate. Voters know the people from their communities, they know their background, their age, the schools they attended and their general history,” he said.
He concluded that while the debate may generate political controversy, the constitutional framework governing eligibility for public office still provides mechanisms for addressing disputes over candidates’ qualifications.
Culled from businessday.ng
Opinion4 days ago