MCE Slams INEC’s 2026 Guidelines As Overregulated, Impractical

The Movement for Credible Elections (MCE) has sharply criticized the newly released 2026 electoral guidelines by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), describing them as “overregulated, impractical, and insufficient to guarantee fair electoral contests.”

In a strongly worded statement signed by its National Secretariat head, Olawale Okunniyi, the group warned that the regulations, if left unchanged, could undermine confidence in the electoral system ahead of the 2027 general elections.

While acknowledging INEC’s intent to improve transparency, particularly in party primaries, MCE argued that “good intentions cannot substitute for sound policy design,” stressing that the framework “falls far short of the structural transformation required to restore public confidence.”

The group’s central criticism focused on what it called excessive regulatory control. According to MCE, the guidelines represent “a troubling expansion of regulatory overreach into the internal affairs of political parties,” warning that rigid rules around candidate selection could erode internal party democracy rather than strengthen it.

MCE also echoed concerns raised by the Inter-Party Advisory Council, noting that restrictive provisions governing primaries could “trigger avoidable disputes, weaken party structures, and further alienate grassroots participants.”

On compliance requirements, the group described INEC’s demand for detailed membership registers, including National Identification Numbers, as “not only impractical but fundamentally exclusionary.” It warned that millions of Nigerians remain outside the national identity database, meaning the rule could “disenfranchise legitimate party members and disproportionately disadvantage smaller parties.”

Raising further alarm, MCE pointed to INEC’s admission that it is operating within a “compressed timetable,” cautioning that rushed processes would “inevitably produce errors, disputes, and litigation—further eroding public trust.”

Perhaps most critically, the group condemned what it described as “continued ambiguity and silence” on the electronic transmission of results. It called this omission “the single most critical demand of the Nigerian electorate,” insisting that any framework lacking “real-time, transparent, and verifiable transmission” cannot ensure electoral credibility.

MCE also faulted the guidelines for weak enforcement provisions, warning they risk becoming “yet another set of rules that are routinely violated without consequence.” It renewed its call for an independent Electoral Offences Commission to tackle impunity.

The statement further linked the shortcomings in the guidelines to Nigeria’s growing voter apathy, describing it as “a rational response to a system widely perceived as compromised.” It argued that without guarantees that votes will count, citizens are unlikely to participate in elections.

Calling for urgent reforms, MCE urged INEC to review the guidelines to avoid “voter apathy and the end of multi-party democracy in Nigeria.” Among its recommendations were mandatory electronic transmission of results, stronger enforcement mechanisms, more flexible compliance rules, extended timelines, and greater stakeholder engagement.

“Nigeria stands at a critical democratic crossroads,” the statement concluded, warning that the credibility of the 2027 elections “will not be determined by the volume of regulations issued, but by the integrity, transparency, and inclusiveness of the electoral process.”

MCE stressed that “public trust is not commanded—it is earned through consistent, verifiable action,” urging INEC to go beyond what it described as “cosmetic reforms” and implement deep structural changes to safeguard the will of Nigerian voters.

End.