In a wave of new advertising fees that could cost presidential hopefuls billions of naira, several Nigerian states have announced steep billboard levies for the 2027 general election. The charges, set by state signage agencies, are being criticised by opposition parties as a deliberate attempt to limit their visibility and create an uneven playing field.
Abia State’s Structure for Signage and Advertisement Agency (ABSSAA) announced in late July that a presidential candidate would pay N200 million for billboard permits, with governorship candidates charged N150 million, senatorial candidates N100 million, House of Representatives candidates N50 million and House of Assembly candidates N20 million. Similar fee structures have been adopted in Enugu, Kogi, Anambra and Imo states.
Under the Electoral Act 2026, a presidential candidate is capped at N10 billion in total campaign spending, while a governorship candidate may spend N3 billion. If every state replicated Abia’s N200 million charge, a presidential campaign would need N7.4 billion just for billboard permits in state capitals, leaving only N2.6 billion for rallies, logistics and media buys. Critics argue the levies push the cost of political entry beyond the statutory limits.
Opposition parties in Enugu rejected the N150 million fee imposed by the Enugu State Structure for Signage and Advertisement Agency (ENSSAA). “This is a national issue that should be looked into and resolved by IPAC if they are serious. It is not specifically for Enugu, and it is not a party thing,” said Dr. Chukwuebuka Okafor, Secretary of the Nigerian Democratic Congress. PDP governorship candidate Chief Uche Nnaji called the policy “very heinous and anti‑democratic” and said the party would challenge it in the Federal High Court, citing freedom of expression and association.
Chief Uchenna Obute, APC Publicity Secretary in Enugu, defended the fee, stating that the ruling party was also paying the prescribed amount and that the allegation of shrinking political space was “baseless.” He added that the fee is an administrative charge aimed at maintaining urban aesthetics.
Opponents argue that the prohibitive pricing violates Sections 39 and 40 of the 1999 Constitution, which protect freedom of expression and association. They also point to the Electoral Act’s spending caps, claiming the levies create a discriminatory advantage for incumbents who can afford to absorb the costs.
Legal challenges and calls for intervention by the Inter‑Party Advisory Council (IPAC) are growing as the election campaign enters full swing. The debate highlights a clash between state revenue measures and the principle of equal opportunity in Nigeria’s democratic process.
<small>Source: The Sun Nigeria — read the original story there.</small>
