Ex-INEC Official Warns Courts Are Dictating Nigerian Election Outcomes

Former Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) Resident Electoral Commissioner Barrister Mike Igini has accused Nigeria’s judiciary of usurping the role of voters in determining electoral outcomes. Speaking in Lagos on Thursday, Igini described the courts as having become a "lost hope" for the electorate, warning that this trend poses a significant threat to the country's democratic consolidation.

The remarks were made during the third edition of the Tunji Braithwaite Symposium, an event focused on the relationship between the judiciary and electoral integrity. Igini, who served as REC for Cross River and Akwa Ibom states for approximately a decade, argued that the current system allows judges to decide who becomes an elected representative rather than ensuring that the will expressed at polling units remains decisive.

Judicial Expansion Undermines Voter Agency

According to Igini, the judiciary, which should serve as the final defense of democracy, is increasingly perceived by Nigerian voters as a conspiracy against their interests. He characterized this development as an "expanding empire of the courts" in political matters, suggesting that the legal system has moved beyond adjudicating disputes to actively shaping political results.

The former commissioner stated that this shift is partly driven by the failure of political institutions to resolve disputes conclusively at the grassroots level. By allowing the courts to assume an expanding role, the system has moved away from citizen-centric decision-making toward a model where judges determine who wins elections, a dynamic Igini believes erodes public trust in the democratic process.

Systemic Flaws Drive Legal Intervention

Igini attributed the growing judicialization of politics to structural weaknesses in the electoral framework. He noted that Nigeria uses an adversarial system where petitioners bear the burden of proving irregularities, whereas an inquisitorial approach would place greater responsibility on the electoral management body to explain its processes. He contrasted this with historical reforms in the United Kingdom, which were introduced partly to prevent political influence over judicial outcomes.

The former REC also criticized the interpretation of provisions governing the electronic transmission of results, suggesting that legal ambiguities have opened the door for excessive judicial intervention. He argued that the current framework inadvertently encourages parties to take disputes to court rather than resolving them through administrative or political channels, further entrenching the courts' role in political questions.

Future Electoral Disputes Remain Uncertain

As Nigeria prepares for future electoral cycles, the debate over the appropriate scope of judicial intervention remains unresolved. The comments by Igini, reported by Sahara Reporters, highlight a growing concern among electoral officials and legal scholars that the current legal architecture may not adequately safeguard the integrity of voter choice. Observers will be watching how legislative and judicial bodies respond to calls for reforming the dispute resolution process.