INEC: We Lack Power to Sanction States Imposing Prohibitive Fees on Opposition for Campaign Billboards

• Says preparation for 2027 elections preventing commission from responding to Auditor General’s query

Adedayo Akinwale in Abuja

Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has said it lacks the constitutional powers to sanction state governments imposing excessive fees on opposition parties erecting campaign billboards ahead of the 2027 general election.

As the 2027 elections approach, various state governments have approved the outrageous review of signage fees in their respective states, apparently, to frustrate opposition parties and deny them a level playing ground.

For instance, the Kogi State government recently approved fees to, according to it, regulate political advertising across the state, ensure compliance with existing signage regulations, and generate revenue for the development of the state.

The state government said the announced fees included N150 million for presidential candidates, N50 million for senatorial candidates, N30 million for House of Representatives candidates, N5 million for State House of Assembly candidates.

More so, N2 million was approved for chairmanship candidates and N300,000 for councillorship candidates for the October local government election in the state.

In Rivers, the state government is charging N75 million for erecting presidential candidates’ billboards and N50 million for governorship billboards.

The story is the same in Abia State where the fee for erecting presidential billboards stands at N200 million; governorship is pegged at N150 million; while senatorial is pegged at N100 million; House of Representatives is N50 million; and House of Assembly is N20 million.

Similarly, in Anambra, a permit for presidential billboards would cost N50 million, senatorial is pegged at N20 million, and House of Representatives N5 million, and state assembly N1.5 million.

In Cross River, presidential billboard fees cost N150 million, while governorship billboards cost N100 million.

In Benue State, the government fixed N40 million for presidential candidates billboards and N35 million for governorship candidates seeking to erect campaign billboards.

The government also fixed N20 million for senatorial candidates, while House of Representatives candidates would pay N10 million and state House of Assembly candidates would pay N5 million.

Reacting to the development, INEC National Commissioner and Chairman Voter Education and Publicity, Mohammed Haruna, told THISDAY that the decision on the cost of such billboards was the prerogative of state and local governments, adding that there are no limits to what they can charge.

Haruna stated, “On your first question there’s not much INEC can do about parties putting up what seems to be prohibitive fees on erecting billboards in states where they rule.

“This is partly because signage for such billboards are the prerogatives of states and local governments and there are no limits to what they can charge and therefore there are no penalties for over charging.

“Sadly, all the parties that are in power in the states are equally guilty. It is also partly because the law itself does not have prescriptions on how the private media must conduct themselves as it does for the public media.”

Responding to the audit query in the Auditor-General of the Federation’s report that the commission spent the sum of N126.46 billion in electoral spending without proper procurement, Haruna said preparations for 2027 elections would not allow the commission to respond to the query at the moment.

The Auditor General’s report had revealed that between January and December 2022 and, in some instances, extending to December 31, 2023, the commission allegedly spent more than N126.46 billion in elections without proper procurement procedures and for goods and services whose delivery could not be established. It was based on this that the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) gave the commission seven days to account for N126.46 billion in electoral spending highlighted in the Auditor-General of or face legal action.

“Because of the commission’s preoccupation with next year’s general election it has not been able to respond to the Auditor General’s query as promptly as it would like to,” Haruna stated.

He added, “However, it will do so in no distant future.”