Who is funding political parties in Nigeria?

Nigerian democracy is once more at a turning point. When looking at the local government polls that have been conducted so far in different states, the lack of transparency in the funding of Nigeria's 18 registered political parties has sparked serious concerns about how the parties are financed as well as the extent of influence, ramifications, and effects of these financial backers on the nation's democratic process. The existence of 18 political parties is meant to be a sign of good fortune in a democracy. Does that apply to Nigerians, though?

Once more, how are the parties maintaining themselves? Is it through open channels like donations, membership fees, and, occasionally, legal business endeavours? The unpleasant truth is that the majority of political parties do not have sizable membership bases, which makes it challenging for them to generate meaningful income from dues. If these parties do have extensive membership records, it is high time they prove it by making such information available to Nigerians. Transparency on this front is sorely lacking, and the parties owe it to the public to clarify where their funds come from.

The cost of running a political party at the national, state, and local government levels, and contesting elections at whatever level in Nigeria is expensive. It includes maintaining local secretariats, rent, utilities, maintenance, paying allowances to party executives, staff remuneration, benefits, purchase of stationery, printing, branding, and promotional materials. It also entails managing election campaigns such as advertising, events, nomination forms, travelling, fuelling, hotel accommodation, mobilization of supporters, and other logistics, etc.

So, what are their sources of funding?

Political parties in Nigeria are meant to be funded by a combination of membership dues, donations, and other legitimate sources according to their constitution. However, what is opaque and remains contentious is the possibility and the extent of subvention receipts from the state. The current state of party funding in Nigeria according to the 1999 Nigeria Constitution and the 2022 Electoral Act can be found in Section 15, Part 1 of the Third Schedule of the 1999 Constitution (As Amended) and Section 2 of the Electoral Act 2010 (As Amended). It can also be gleaned in the code of conduct for political parties. These laws and binding agreements aim to ensure transparency and accountability in party financing. However, the lack of cooperation and coordination among parties, particularly at all levels, undermines democratic principles.

Now let’s take a critical look at the funding structure. Donations are a key source of funding, but parties without any seats, elected representatives, or clout cannot possibly attract significant donations or patronage. So, the question of funding becomes even more puzzling here. After all, why would anyone donate to a party that lacks influence or a voice in decision-making processes? Yet, some of these fringe parties remain afloat, raising suspicions about their true sources of funding. If these smaller parties claim to be receiving donations, they should openly declare their benefactors. The Nigerian people deserve to know who is bankrolling these entities. If the parties cannot provide transparency on this issue, they become complicit in perpetuating a system of opacity, and deceit, and are part of the broader systemic scam that is being perpetrated against Nigeria and its citizens.

Still, fundamental questions remain: how are these parties surviving? Do they have business ventures generating income? If so, where are these businesses, and how successful are they? If parties claim to have such ventures, they should provide the details for public scrutiny. The truth, however, is that most parties do not engage in any profitable ventures that could sustain their operations. This lack of transparency fuels speculation that many political parties may be receiving funds from questionable sources.

The so-called big parties have bigger questions to answer. That is, those with presidents, governors, senators, and members of the House of Representatives, etc, are not immune from scrutiny. Can these parties truly claim that membership dues are keeping them afloat? The reality is that they, too, likely rely on more opaque means to fund their activities. It would be reasonable to suggest that these big parties may be siphoning public funds, whether from state or federal coffers, to maintain their operations.
The boundaries between party and state resources, for example, are sometimes blurred when a party controls the President, the governorship, or a majority in the legislature because those individuals are frequently referred to as the party's leader at those levels. Therefore, it is reasonable to anticipate that public funds could be transferred to support the political apparatus in the absence of accurate accounting. These funds, which ought to go towards public welfare or development initiatives, may instead be used for political campaigns and party expenditures.

What part does IPAC play in all of this? The code of conduct for political parties, which specifies moral behaviour for campaigns and elections, is signed by the 18 political parties. However, a lot of people disregard these rules, frequently conspiring with state governments to undermine the democratic process.

Unfortunately, the Inter-Party Advisory Council that saddled itself with protecting the interest of parties, and promoting unity, and cooperation among parties has failed in that regard. The actions or inactions of IPAC at different levels often show support or tacitly condone electoral irregularities thus failing to uphold the code of conduct. IPAC’s inertia is also evident, instead of raising concerns over constitutional violations and electoral travesties, the council remains largely passive, allowing state governments to continue subverting democracy at the grassroots level, as it fails to speak out against the injustices its members face, leaving smaller parties vulnerable and powerless thus resulting in situations where parties are not only excluded from elections, but are also discouraged from challenging electoral outcomes through legal means.

States are notorious for forcing their chosen candidates on the electorate, and the absurdity of local government elections, where manipulation is the norm, is a stark illustration of these charges. The credibility of elections is essentially undermined by these travesties, which are made feasible by state electoral rules that frequently deviate from national principles and the 1999 Nigerian Constitution and the 2022 Electoral Act. The State Independent Electoral Commissions, which were established to supervise these elections, are merely instruments in the hands of the ruling parties, enabling them to maintain power through whatever means necessary.

So, are we in a mode of deceit or democracy? When opposition parties conspire to mislead the electorate, how can Nigerians claim to live in a democracy? It is not just the ruling parties that are guilty; the so-called opposition parties often appear to be working hand in glove with those in power, perpetuating a system designed to enrich the political elite at the expense of the Nigerian people. If political parties cannot sustain themselves transparently, through legitimate means such as dues, donations, or business ventures, they may be fronts for siphoning public funds.
The foundation of Nigerian democracy is threatened by this lack of transparency. Nigerians are entitled to know the source of these parties' funding. Is it the general populace or a select group of influential people with special interests? Parties effectively have no business in politics if they are unable to demonstrate that their funding is coming from legal sources. In addition to misleading Nigerians, they are also sustaining the corruption that has long afflicted the nation's political system.