•House of Representatives
Executive Director of Development Specs Academy, Prof Okey Ikechukwu, has criticised the recent move by federal lawmakers to increase campaign spending limits for political candidates.
Recall that the House of Representatives yesterday increased campaign spending limits for candidates contesting elective offices, raising the maximum presidential campaign expenditure from N5 billion to N10 billion; and governorship’s from N1 billion to N3 billion.
The legislators raised the spending cap during yesterday’s plenary, following the clause-by-clause consideration of the report seeking an amendment to the Electoral Act 2022.
However, Ikechukwu argued on Channels Television today that while the approved limits might appear excessive to the general public, they fall far short of the actual cost of running competitive political campaigns in the country.
Ikechukwu described the figures as both ”unrealistic” and disconnected from the realities of Nigerian politics.
“Yes, it exceeds the value of many businesses, but it is also very unrealistic. The money is too little, and you think it’s big.
“It’s a classic joke unless you don’t understand politics or you haven’t been involved in the activities,” he said.
‘Hidden Costs’ of Nigerian Politics
Lawmakers approved significant increases in campaign spending limits, raising the cap for presidential candidates from ₦5 billion to ₦10 billion.
Under the amendments, the maximum amount governorship candidates can spend on campaigns was increased from ₦1 billion to ₦3 billion, while the ceiling for senatorial candidates was raised fivefold from ₦100 million to ₦500 million.
Ikechukwu, however, said the official spending limits fail to account for the informal and pre-election costs that dominate Nigeria’s political process, particularly during party primaries.
“You are talking about election spending, does it include what I will spend before getting the ticket?” he asked.
“Where perhaps I have to give the godfathers between ₦500 million and ₦1.5 billion, that’s number one,” he added.
The analyst added that campaign logistics alone consumed vast sums, especially in governorship races that require extensive movement across local government areas.
“Let’s suppose it’s the governorship, and I am moving from one local government to another, and I have about 25 to 30 vehicles. You think of fueling, you think of what I will pay security, and this campaign is going to last three months,” he said.
According to him, the amounts stipulated in the amended law would barely sustain a campaign for a few weeks, while accusing lawmakers of “absolute political dishonesty.”
Responding to concerns about the contrast between lavish campaign convoys and widespread economic hardship, Ikechukwu admitted that the situation presented a troubling contradiction.
“It is an anomaly. But when the people who are meant to make the laws make laws that suit their shortcomings, you will not have a good society,” he said.
He explained that campaign convoys and spending were often seen by politicians as a display of influence and control rather than luxury.
“The size of the convoy shows the extent of their leverage,” he said, adding that such outings involve costs beyond transportation.
“You are going to make T-shirts, fez caps, hire buses at the local level, and give money to party leaders, including ward chairmen. Frankly, it is ridiculous.
“The issue is not just the limit, it is the system that makes these expenses unavoidable in the first place,” Okey said.
