The year 2024 marked 25 years of uninterrupted democratic rule in Nigeria. The 2024 electoral calendar, featuring four types of national and state elections tested public confidence in the electoral process and the commitment of democratic institutions and political actors to electoral integrity. At the federal level, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) conducted two off-cycle governorship elections in Edo and Ondo, bye-elections in two senatorial districts in Yobe and Ebonyi states, as well as four federal constituencies, and three state constituencies. Additionally, court ordered rerun elections arising from the decisions of election tribunals on the 2023 general elections held in thirty-six federal constituencies.

At the sub-national level, state electoral commissions conducted local government elections in 28 states. Disappointingly, these elections dampened citizens’ trust as they were signposted by poor management, electoral malpractices, vote buying, electoral violence and unbridled political interference. As Yiaga Africa noted, local government elections were a travesty of democratic elections. The 2024 electoral cycle exposed the fragility of Nigeria’s electoral process and affirmed that political actors were succeeding in rolling back most reforms previously introduced to enhance the quality of Nigerian elections.

In the bye-elections and re-run elections, seven parties won constituencies as follows: the All Progressives Congress (APC) won 20 constituencies, the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) secured 15, Young Progressive Party (YPP) won 4, New Nigeria’s People’s Party (NNPP) won 3 while African Democratic Party (ADP), All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA) and Labor Party (LP) each won one constituency. APC won the two off-cycle governorship elections. For the local government elections, the party of the incumbent state governor overwhelmingly secured all the local government chairman positions and councillor seats except in very few instances where some seats were allocated to other parties.

2024 electoral headwinds and critical takeaways

Election logistics challenges, a persistent but surmountable issue
For over two decades, every election (national and local) has been plagued with delays or shortages in materials and personnel. While some of these operational challenges are deliberately created to influence electoral outcomes, others reflect a poor planning culture. However, the elections held in 2024 affirm that intentional planning, foresight and attention to detail can reverse the trend of logistics challenges. Most elections conducted by INEC in 2024 recorded early arrival of election materials except in the Edo governorship election, the Plateau bye-election and Enugu rerun election. Even in the face of election logistics sabotage by external actors, INEC demonstrated resilience by activating other options to ensure election materials and personnel were deployed in good time.

Increasing mockery of tech-enabled innovations for protecting election integrity

In 2020, INEC introduced the BVAS and IReV to strengthen the integrity, transparency and credibility of election results management. While the BVAS ensures only eligible registered voters cast their ballot and prevents multiple voting, the IReV ensures voters can access polling unit level results, enhancing transparency of elections results and disincentivising manipulation of election results during collation. However, cases of multiple results from a polling unit, discrepancies in hardcopy results sheets and results uploaded on the IReV revealed the extent to which political actors, enabled by compromised election officials, undermined the same technology aimed at safeguarding the integrity of the electoral process. Concerns about cost, technology penetration, and cybersecurity did not drive the initial opposition to the BVAS and IReV. Instead, it was largely driven by the fear that technology could potentially expose and limit electoral fraud. For instance, the IReV and BVAS exposed human interference with election results or accreditation data. Without these tools, the public would remain unaware of the depth of electoral manipulation experienced in recent elections.

No more red lines
A dark side of the 2024 electoral cycle was the tactics employed by the political class toward electoral politics. In an attempt to secure electoral victories at all costs, political actors brazenly utilised election manipulation tactics including results tampering, intimidation of election officials and violent disruption of elections to undermine all efforts to strengthen electoral integrity.

For instance, INEC had to suspend bye-elections in Kano, Akwa Ibom and Enugu due to disruption, irregularities and abduction of election officials. In the Kunchi/Tsanyawa state constituency, political actors mobilised thugs to hijack election materials and conduct the election. Similarly, in the recent Edo governorship election, collation officers allegedly altered results from four LGAs during collation. Local government elections were not exempt, as SIECs disregarded actual votes cast and allocated votes to candidates of ruling parties in the states. These patterns of election manipulation are consistent with those from previous elections, further undermining the legitimacy of the outcomes.

INEC and SIECs capture Is real
Political interference and assault on the operational and financial independence of election management bodies is a potent tool employed by political actors, especially incumbents to tilt the electoral scale in their favour. Many electoral commissions were starved of funds to conduct elections. INEC is believed to have received its funding late to conduct the off-cycle elections. During a recent roundtable on local government elections hosted by Yiaga Africa, most Chairpersons lamented how state governors deprive SIECs of funds. In some cases, election procurements were even determined by state governors.

The appointment of partisan individuals into electoral commissions to serve vested political interest deepens the distrust in the electoral process. Many civil society groups who opposed the appointment of some Resident Electoral Commissioners based on concerns over competence, experience and neutrality felt vindicated by their conduct during the 2024 elections. For instance, the Resident Electoral Commissioner for Edo state whose familial ties to federal minister was a subject of controversy due to his familial links with a federal minister, raising concerns about neutrality. However, calls for his redeployment in the build-up to the Edo governorship elections were rejected by INEC.

The logistics challenges and poor stakeholder engagement underscored his lack of experience. In contrast, the REC for Ondo, a former INEC Director exhibited exemplary competence and capacity which led to the successful conduct of the 2024 Ondo governorship election. In Ondo, by 7:30am, polling officials had arrived in 71% of polling units, unlike 43% recorded in Edo. This marked difference underscores the imperative of experience and competence in nominating individuals into INEC.

At the state level, governors appointed their former aides and card-carrying members of political parties into SIECs. These ‘strategic appointments’ are intentional political strategy to strip electoral commissions are stripped of the independence and capacity to deliver credible elections.

On a positive note, 2024 saw an increasing trend of appointing former and current INEC staff as Resident Electoral Commissioners and National Commissioners. While this practice may potentially enhance the quality of nominations into INEC given their expertise, it must be based on competence, integrity and proven records of high performance. Introducing a mandatory timeframe during which former INEC staff must be out of the commission before becoming eligible for such appointments is necessary to necessary to avoid perceptions of bias. A definite timeframe would prevent the approach from being misconstrued as a reward for delivering favorable outcomes, particularly since the appointing authority benefits directly from elections conducted by INEC.

Vote buying remain a growing blight
The conversion of polling units into market place for buying and selling of votes delegitimises electoral outcomes. This menace has become entrenched in Nigeria’s electoral process with all elections held in 2024 recording widespread vote buying. As reported by most election observers, votes traded between N5000 – N20,000 in off-cycle governorship elections. The higher the competitiveness an election, the higher the cost of a vote. The challenging economic situation of the country has further exacerbated the cases of vote buying in 2024.

On a positive note, while enforcement agencies have made arrests, prosecution of electoral offenders are still pending. Among law enforcement agencies, the Economic and Finance Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Department of State Services (DSS) stood out for arresting vote buyers in Edo and Ondo. Other security agencies and law enforcement agencies need to demonstrate greater commitment to combating the menace of vote buying.

These 2024 headwinds explain the apparent lack of public confidence in the electoral process. It also reaffirms the weaknesses of democratic institution like INEC, SIECs, and political parties. The reliance of old election rigging tactics further attests to these weaknesses. As the culture of impunity deepens so does the legitimacy of electoral outcomes. The urgency of electoral reform preceded by character reform is the only path to reclaiming electoral integrity and rebuilding trust in the electoral system.

Charting the path to electoral integrity in 2025 and beyond
2025 is a crucial year for laying the groundwork for Nigeria’s 2027 general election. In December 2025, there will a leadership transition at the helm of INEC as the current Chairman of the commission completes his second and final term. This leadership transition will significantly impact the management of the 2027 elections. The National Assembly must also conclude all electoral amendments to provide certainty in the legal framework for the next elections. Impressively, both chambers have committed to concluding the reforms by mid 2025.

As we look forward to 2025, the following four hurdles must be scaled to guarantee clean and safe elections for the coming year and beyond: First, rebuilding citizens’ trust in the capacity of proposed electoral reforms to address the excesses of political actors and systemic challenges in the electoral process and secondly, concluding all election-related administrative, legal and constitutional reforms in 2025 to ensure certainty in the legal framework ahead of the February 2026 release of the 2027 election timetable. Thirdly, building national consensus on the composition of INEC and SIECS, especially the qualification, mode of appointment and mechanisms for safeguarding the operational and financial independence of election management bodies and lastly, securing the commitment of key stakeholders like INEC, security agencies, political parties and transport unions like the National Union of Road Transport Workers (NURTW) to credible, inclusive and peaceful elections.

Surmounting these hurdles requires leadership and statesmanship from the president and the National assembly, active citizenship, and, finally, a resilient, cohesive, and unbiased civil society and media.

Samson Itodo is an election, democracy, and public policy enthusiast. Itodo serves as the Executive Director of Yiaga Africa and Principal Partner of the Election Law Center. He is also a member of the Kofi Annan Foundation board and the Board of Advisers of International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA). Comments and feedback to sitodo@yiaga.org