Kenechukwu Obiezu
Ahead of the 2027 general elections, political movements are sprouting like wild mushrooms across Nigeria’s political landscape. Their excesses and eccentricities, together with the abundant possibilities for illicit electoral financing, would test Nigeria’s election machinery and, more importantly, the will of Nigerians to correct decades of bad leadership and debilitating underdevelopment.
The City Boy Movement versus the Village Boy Movement.
The fierce conversations that recently dominated Nigerian social and mainstream media centered around the City Boy Movement. The group describes itself as a youth-driven platform promoting civic engagement, leadership, and awareness of government policies in Nigeria.
Formed to support President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, it claims to have spread in all thirty- six states of the country and the Federal Capital Territory. The initiation of two popular Igbo socialites and billionaires, Paschal Okechukwu popularly known as Cubana Chief Priest and Obinna Iyiegbu recently stirred a strong backlash against the group especially in the Southeast region where the All Progressives Congress has always found a harvest of banana peels.
The attempts of Paschal Okechukwu and Obinna Iyiegbu to promote the City Boy Movement in the Southeast which is a major stronghold of wildly popular opposition figure and political dark horse, Peter Obi and his raucous Obidient political movement, is another major reason the City Boy Movement has come under such intense scrutiny.
It is mainly as a response that the Village Boy Movement, its antithesis and probable nemesis, has been formed. Largely made up of members of the Obidient political movement, the Village Boys Movement, which describes itself as uncompromised and unstoppable, is self-styled as a grassroots organization dedicated to empowering rural communities across Nigeria. While it lays claims to a local base, it no doubt has its eyes on the political scalp of the City Boy Movement and the All Progressives Congress in the upcoming 2027 general elections.
While the City Boy Movement, which has grown rapidly as President Tinubu has consolidated power, can count on a more robust structure and support system given its connections to the corridors of power; the Village Boy Movement, as a counter measure, brings the rugged defiance of frustrated everyday Nigerians to the equation. Crucially, it can also count on the sympathy and agency of many diaspora Nigerians who see Peter Obi as Nigeria’s last hope.
These movements, while not political parties, count many politically conscious Nigerians in their ranks as well as socialites and entertainers. Their swirling activities provide a taste of what is to come in the 2027 elections. More than that, they can test the durability of Nigeria’s electoral institutions.
The grimy pole of Nigeria’s elections.
Like any other serious social endeavor, electioneering is expensive. The problem is that money plays an inordinate role in Nigerian elections, where vote-buying and the brazen capture of electoral institutions are all too common. The failure to regulate the influx of money into Nigeria’s pre-election and election processes often makes elections a straight shootout between those who have the means to buy political power and those who do not.
Like a viscous toxic grime, the heavy presence of financial resources in Nigeria’s elections tend to corrupt and compromise the electoral process and inevitably blurs the choices presented to voters. Unfortunately, this outcome perpetuates a vicious cycle of bad leadership where those who buy their way into public offices deploy public funds to buy continuity in office.
The law leaves a legion of loopholes.
The law in Nigeria presumes to recognize the dangers of illicit electoral financing as it tries to mirror what happens elsewhere in seeking to regulate the influx of money into elections in the country.
Under Electoral Act 2026, presidential candidates can spend up to ten billion Naira for campaigns which is up from five billion Naira under Electoral Act 2022. Governorship candidates can spend three billion Naira on campaigns, a significant increase from the one billion Naira limit allowed under Electoral Act 2022. For those who aspire to go to the Senate, up to five hundred million can be spent for campaigns up from one hundred million naira. The problem with the enabling sections of the Electoral Act is not from a paucity of legislation. Rather, it has much to do with the absence of sanctions, which begs the question of what happens when guidelines on electoral financing are flouted. This is particularly relevant in Nigeria where compliance and regulatory gaps abound.
As with many other legislations in Nigeria, there is no provision for rigorous monitoring of elections laws and guidelines. Absent strict enforcement of elections laws, election financiers have in the past used their inordinate financial resources to influence electoral outcomes to the detriment of fair and free elections.
A clash of movements and motives.
Electoral transparency, accountability and institutional integrity are necessary guiderails against the use of public funds to sponsor political parties in Nigeria and the legion of political activists loyal to them. This is particularly relevant to the City Boy Movement that directly and indirectly support state governors and public office holders that are members of the All Progressives Congress.
The use of public funds in Nigeria’s elections should be strictly limited to activities that inform and enforce electoral laws and guidelines, and not diverted to private party interests. Political patronage has long been a destabilizing factor in Nigeria’s realpolitik. For most Nigerians becoming a politician and occupying a public office is the surest means to pecuniary wealth, service to the country and the citizenry are negligible considerations.
Thus, for many who support one candidate or the other during elections, reward takes many forms. Political appointments alone are not sufficient, contracts for key infrastructure development are hence proliferated, inflated, and poorly executed. Indeed, Nigeria’s culture of political patronage directly underpins its struggle with corruption and bad leadership.
No easy way out
The right to form political associations is enshrined in Section 40 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended.) This right to associate guarantees individual freedoms when acting in groups.
The unfortunate experience over the years, however, is that many of these political movements effectively and strenuously undermine democracy and the constitution. They are often involved in vote buying, voter intimidation, and rigging elections. Urgent meaningful reforms are needed. Firstly, the National Assembly should further amend the electoral law to empower the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to register and regulate political parties. Secondly, the parties should be required to register with Nigeria’s crime-fighting agencies, including the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC), these steps would ensure that financial activities engaged by parties remain open to scrutiny.
Finally, Nigerians should remain vigilant. Vigilance is the price of freedom. The just concluded local council elections in the Federal Capital Territory witnessed a disappointingly low turnout of voters. Such indifference is an ominous sign of what is to come in 2027, and Nigerians cannot afford it. Nigeria’s multifaceted problems, which include insecurity and poverty, trace their source directly to bad leadership, voter-apathy and bad leadership are thus causally linked.
Nigerians who refuse to vote will only play into the hands of the illicit financiers of elections in Nigeria.
