Plaintiffs Challenge State Signage Charge, Seek Court Order to Stop Enforcement
The presidential candidate of the Allied Peoples Movement (APM), Oyo State Governor Seyi Makinde, and the party have sued the Abia State Government, Governor Alex Otti and other officials over an alleged ₦200 million campaign fee imposed on presidential candidates seeking to display campaign materials in the state.
The suit, marked HC/214/2026, was filed at the Abia State High Court by their lawyer, Musibau Adetunbi, SAN. The plaintiffs argue that the fee is inconsistent with the Constitution, the Electoral Act 2026 and other relevant laws.
The plaintiffs said they became aware of the fee while preparing to commence their nationwide campaign, arguing that imposing similar charges across states would make compliance with the statutory campaign spending limit difficult.
Listed as defendants alongside Otti are the Abia State Attorney-General, the Abia State Signage and Advertisement Agency (ASAA) and the Abia State House of Assembly.
Governor Makinde and the APM are seeking, among other reliefs, an order setting aside regulations made by ASAA on political campaign signage, including the ₦200 million fee imposed on presidential candidates.
They are also asking the court to restrain the defendants and their agents from enforcing the fee or removing, defacing, destroying or obstructing the placement of their campaign billboards and outdoor advertisements in Abia.
The plaintiffs want the court to declare the ₦200 million fee unconstitutional and inconsistent with provisions of the Electoral Act 2026, particularly those governing political campaigns and the use of state regulatory bodies during elections.
They argued that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has exclusive constitutional and statutory responsibility for making rules and regulations governing political campaigns for elections.
The plaintiffs further argued that Section 99(2) of the Electoral Act 2026 prohibits the use of state apparatus, administrative bodies or regulatory mechanisms to give an advantage or disadvantage to any candidate or political party.
They also cited Section 92 of the Electoral Act, which they said caps total expenditure for a presidential campaign at ₦10 billion nationwide. According to them, imposing similar fees across states and the FCT could consume a substantial portion of the statutory limit through billboard expenses alone.
The plaintiffs acknowledged that states have regulatory powers over outdoor advertising but argued that such powers cannot be exercised in a manner that overrides or frustrates federal legislation governing elections.
They further relied on Sections 1(3) and 4(5) of the 1999 Constitution, arguing that any state law or administrative regulation inconsistent with an Act of the National Assembly is invalid to the extent of the inconsistency.
Governor Makinde and the APM urged the court to intervene before enforcement of the fee causes what they described as irreparable harm to the campaign and the constitutional right to seek public office.