President Tinubu’s campaign posters that previously decorated the expressway to Abuja Airport have been pulled down overnight, and quietly too. A video that trended last week suggested the rapid cleanup was a response to President Trump’s message for the Tinubu-led government to shape up on insecurity. In Lagos as well, same posters had by last week disappeared from highways leading to and from the Murtala Muhammed Airport.

This writer had previously lamented what had become a premature 2027 campaigns before this administration clocked two years in office, a development that was a clear violation of the Electoral Act 2022. According to the Act, campaigns could only happen 150 days before the polling day and must end 24 hours prior. The concern was simply that, allowing campaigns outside approved timelines constituted distractionsto quality governance, besides giving undue advantage to the ruling party and government.

Those concerned argued that the unruly campaigns were not the direct handiwork of government, but that of their overzealous supporters and contractor friends who want to impress their benefactors in government. It is an embarrassment that it was the ruling party that set a bad example for others to follow, flooding the cities with campaign posters, when there was little to show as scorecard.

When the infraction was brought to the notice of INEC, under Mahmoud Yakubu, the Commission pleaded that there were no specific sanctions in the Electoral Act to punish early campaigners. The Commission added that it raised the issues with political parties and urged them to comply with the law. No prosecution. Human rights campaigner and lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN), among other Nigerians were outraged at INEC’s helplessness.

Falana insisted that INEC has the constitutional authority to charge early campaigners before the court to test the limits of the law. He said: “The law cannot cover all situations. The lawmakers thought they were dealing with a civilised political class. No. Now that they are violating the law, it makes it a duty, empowered by the Constitution and the Electoral Act, to bring out the rules and regulations.”

While it may be said that the fear of President Trump has become the beginning of wisdom for this government, it is doubtful the Trump effect was responsible for the pulling down of Mr President’s campaign posters. Indeed, one expects the Trump effect to ginger introspection among the political class, going forward.

Where there had been brazen attempts at state capture, we may begin to see a little tempering and leg-room for the opposition to breathe. However, we do not need Trump to micromanage Nigeria’s political space. It is sufficient that the world is watching and the politicians cannot continue to be reckless.

A conscious INEC does not need an external influence to deal with petty violators of electoral laws. For this democracy to thrive, it is recommended that the attitude of the electoral umpire is not one of ‘I’m helpless.’A pliant umpire is one who goes to town lamenting and complaining, like the lazy farmer that blames the tools for his inadequacies.

Unfortunately, that was the record of INEC since 1999, and more in the last eight years. In that regard, one is tempted to assume it is the new chair of INEC, Prof Joash Amupitan, a professor of law, that drew the lid on early campaigns. He could have quietly sent a message to the beneficiaries to rein in their overzealous contractors, who probably, have amassed slush funds they don’t know what to spend it on. Let them be patient.

It is not too much to expect, that a professor of law, who has an international reputation to protect, will not condone illegalities that have become part and parcel of the party system. The parties are in a mess and hopefully, thismight be the time to instill common sense and order in the management of parties.

Time will tell how far Prof. Amupitan would go to uphold his personal record and sanitise the country’s wobbly democracy. One can only plead with the INEC boss to stay on the path of truth. Millions of Nigerians and friends in the international community want to see changes in the electoral system.

The Anambra governorship was a skewed contest. Analysts have recorded a win for INEC in the recent governorship election in Anambra. Some have attributed the success to the Amupitan effect. He must not be deceived. The template for Anambra elections had been worked out long before the chair assumed office.

Governor Charles Soludo and President Tinubu had made a pact, that Soludo would not be disturbed in his bid for a second term. To return the favour, Soludo promised that his political party, the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), would not be fielding a presidential candidate in 2027.

The only political party that has the capacity to ruffle Soludo in the election, if it so desired, is the All Progressives Congress (APC). But to make things easy, the party decided to field a candidate with no weight and denied him the full complement of support from APC’s national secretariat. He couldn’t make a reasonable impact.

The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Labour Party (LP), in their present form cannot contest serious election. That may change towards 2007. They’re presently terrorised from within. To stand against an incumbent governor who deploys state resources for campaigns, is no child’s play, especially in this era of vote-buying. It is only the Federal Government that has capacity to neutralise such monstrosity, as was deployed in Edo State in September 2024. It’s all wrong and must be corrected, going forward.

So, while he savours the accolades of election observers, who rate the Anambra guber very high, let Prof. Amupitan not take his eyes off the real issues. There cannot be electoral fairness in a system where an incumbent has unfettered access to state resources, to the disadvantage of other contestants. Part of the electoral reforms canvassed overtime by stakeholders is to have a system where an incumbent does not take all the advantages.

In a state where an incumbent runs weekly paid-for television promotions, he still goes to the campaign field with the purse and entire machinery of government. INEC and stakeholders can sample best global practices to make the playing field less unfair.

Parties in a shamble

Professor Amupitan should be concerned that there is no internal discipline in the parties, borrowing from the Anambra template. The PDP is a disorganised house and the clearest example is that the candidate of the party in the just concluded election, Jude Ezenwafor, has been suspended for one month for allegedly sabotaging PDP.

At the time the party was still studying the outcome of the election, the contestant had gone to congratulate Soludo and pledged support for the APGA government. It’s like his body was in PDP but his soul was elsewhere. That advertises the disorderliness in parties; no discipline, no loyalty.

The PDP is dealing with different court matters instituted by characters who are bent on destroying the party. The meddlesomeness and duplicity of the judiciary have not helped matters. In the case of the Labour Party, the Supreme Court has ruled that parties be allowed to manage their internal affairs. The party has put in place a caretaker committee to steer the party away from trouble. But INEC has refused to recognise the Nenadi Usman-led committee.

The reason the shenanigans should interest the INEC chair is because he is a professor of law. He owes the country the responsibility to disentangle the legal webs and give the right interpretation. He should see through the antics of politicians who have no interest in democratic growth but are in the game to market themselves.

In the case of Labour Party, the Supreme Court said parties should determine their leadership, but one tiny faction has held on to the LP like a leach. The party cannot move forward, because INEC is acting somebody’s dastardly script. Let the professor read between the lines and issue notice to those parading as party leaders, whereas they are agents of destabilisation, orchestrated paymasters to make a one-party rule inevitable.

Reckless defection of elected executives and legislators

There is a sickening gale of defection from opposition parties to the ruling party, which INEC must curb to strengthen the party system. Politicians can go wherever they want, but the ticket that won them election belongs to the party. Any governor or lawmaker who defects must return the ticket to his original party and go home to prepare for another.

This is common sense and is supported by natural justice. But the Constitution is contorted by the judiciary to allow defectors make a mess of democracy when they abandon parties that gave them tickets and campaigned for their elections. It is sheer robbery.

For example, the 27 lawmakers in the Rivers State House of Assembly, who were originally members of the PDP decamped to the APC when they had no constitutional reason to do so. But the lawmakers have refused to vacate their seats in compliance with Section 109(g) of the Constitution.

They ran to a High Court to compel INEC not to declare their seats vacant. President Tinubu begged Governor Fubara to allow them defect to APC after a dubious attempt to force a settlement.

It will be interesting to see how a distinguished professor of law at INEC responds to these silly pranks of political jobbers, aided by judicial rascality.

In the early years of this democracy, INEC was far more powerful in the regulation of party primaries and conventions. But over the years, politicians in the National Assembly have found ways to whittle down the powers of INEC to oversight primaries and other party activities.

They want to be allowed free rein to decide when to hold primaries and who to sell tickets to. The rules are that all aspirants must be allowed to contest. Parties now sell tickets to money-bags and its unhealthy for our democracy.

Finally, let INEC not take the Anambra guber as the standard. There are challenges ahead, but with strategic reforms in the right places, the task could be even easier!