Anaba, Osigwe, Utomi Raise Alarm Over Election Credibility, Judicialisation, Institutional Decay

THE President of the Nigerian Guild of Editors (NGE), Eze Anaba, has called for greater protection of the credibility of Nigeria’s electoral process to prevent the courts from becoming the ultimate arbiters of who represents the people.

Anaba spoke against the backdrop of concerns over the increasing number of election petitions and the growing role of the judiciary in determining electoral outcomes.

“The credibility of the ballot must be protected so that the courts do not have to replace the citizenry in determining who should represent the people,” Anaba said.

He spoke at the 2026 All Nigeria Editors Conference (ANEC) in Enugu, where discussions focused on the ballot, the media, democracy and the challenges posed by misinformation and emerging technology.

According to Anaba, voters can only make informed electoral choices when they have access to credible information and are protected from intimidation and undue influence.

He therefore said the media’s responsibility began long before election day, stressing that editors must provide citizens with reliable information with which to assess candidates, policies and government performance.

He said such information should enable voters to make decisions without being manipulated by political propaganda or misinformation.

The former President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Olumide Osigwe, also raised concerns about the increasing involvement of the courts in electoral contests.

Speaking on “Election Petition in the Digital Age: Independence, Evidence, BVAS,” Osigwe said Nigeria had become one of the countries with a high number of election petitions.

“I see that Nigeria is one of the countries with the highest number of election petitions, and all because the courts are very frequently involved in determining either the outcome or who won,” he said.

Osigwe recalled that a judge had previously described the development as the “judicialisation of the electoral process.”

He said the expression reflected a situation where disputes that originate at polling units increasingly move into courtrooms, making judges key actors in determining the political fate of candidates.

“All too often, the courts are merely called in to give direction on issues of procedure,” he said.

According to him, difficulties in proving alleged electoral violations, the manner in which elections are conducted and the limited time available to petitioners to establish their cases have combined to make election litigation increasingly complicated.

Osigwe also questioned aspects of the evidential framework governing election petitions, particularly where technologies such as the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) and the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV) are involved.

He argued that technologies introduced to improve electoral transparency should not create additional obstacles for candidates seeking to establish what happened at polling units.

“Technology,” he maintained, “should make elections more transparent rather than make it harder for petitioners to prove what happened at polling units.”

He also questioned the treatment of subpoenaed evidence, particularly documents that petitioners may not have been able to obtain before filing their cases.

On IReV, Osigwe argued that the platform should receive meaningful evidential recognition in election litigation, even if it is not treated as the primary evidence of election results.

He further raised concerns about proposed legal provisions which, according to him, could prevent non-compliance with INEC regulations and guidelines from constituting grounds for challenging an election.

He argued that where the electoral commission is empowered to make regulations and guidelines, compliance with those rules should have consequences for the credibility of the electoral process.

The central question, he said, was whether a person should be declared the winner of an election when there are unresolved questions about whether the process leading to that declaration complied with established rules.

Osigwe also questioned the familiar political expression, “Go to court,” often directed at candidates who reject disputed election outcomes.

He said the expression raised questions about the level of confidence political actors have in the electoral justice system and the effectiveness of judicial redress.

The former NBA president also raised concerns about public perceptions of corruption within the judiciary, while making clear that he was not personally endorsing allegations of bribery against judges.

He said the widespread perception that litigants might have to pay for favourable judicial outcomes was itself damaging to public confidence in the justice system.

According to him, the issue is particularly sensitive because the judiciary represents the final institutional avenue for candidates and citizens who believe an election has been conducted improperly.

He warned that if citizens lose confidence in that avenue, the consequences could extend beyond individual election petitions to the legitimacy of the democratic process.

Osigwe also questioned public confidence in the independence of the electoral commission, particularly the process through which its officials are appointed.

He said concerns about the independence of the electoral umpire could affect perceptions of election results even before disputes reach the courts.

“The concern is not merely institutional. Where the electoral umpire is perceived as lacking independence, the credibility of election results can be affected even before disputes reach the courts,” he said.

He added that this could increase the likelihood of litigation and place additional pressure on the judiciary.

On his part, political economist Pat Utomi broadened the discussion, warning that weaknesses in the electoral system could have consequences beyond elections and ultimately affect the stability of the country.

Utomi said elections were essential to legitimising government and building strong institutions.

“If the people are convinced that there is no point, what is an election? Imagine the amount of money we waste to have elections that are totally meaningless because they do not legitimise anybody,” he said.

He argued that strong institutions create predictable rules and reduce uncertainty, while the normalisation of abnormal practices increases the cost of doing business and weakens public confidence in legitimate avenues for resolving grievances.

“What has happened to us, unfortunately, is because the abnormal has become so accepted that the transaction costs of engaging in Nigeria are such that we are only heading in one direction — ultimate collapse,” Utomi warned.

He said the media had a critical responsibility to help prevent such institutional decay.

The interventions reinforced Anaba’s central message that the credibility of elections must be protected at the point where citizens cast their ballots, so that electoral disputes do not routinely shift the responsibility for determining political representation from voters to the courts.