2027: Makinde, APM Sue Otti Over Alleged N200m Campaign Fee In Abia

UMUAHIA — The presidential candidate of the Allied Peoples Movement and Governor of Oyo State, Seyi Makinde, and his party have sued Abia State Governor, Alex Otti, over alleged imposition of N200 million campaign fee on presidential candidates seeking to display campaign materials in the state.

The suit marked HU/214/2026 was filed before the Abia State High Court, Umuahia Judicial Division, on September 17, by plaintiffs’ lawyer, Musibau Adetunbi, SAN, alongside Ire Egert-Olusesi, Ridwan Azeez, Oluwabusola Oluwaniyi and Joseph Lukman of Musibau Adetunbi, SAN & Co., Ibadan.

Joined as defendants are the Abia State Attorney-General, the Abia State Signage and Advertisement Agency, ABSAA, and the State House of Assembly, with a request that all four be served within 30 days.

According to Punch newspaper, Makinde and APM argued the fee imposed by the signage agency was unconstitutional and violated provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 and other relevant laws.

They are seeking, among other reliefs, an order setting aside regulations made by ABSAA concerning political campaigns, including the N200m fee imposed on presidential candidates or any other amount.

They also asked for a perpetual injunction restraining defendants and their agents from enforcing the fee and from “removing, defacing, destroying or obstructing” placement of their campaign billboards and outdoor advertisements within Abia.

The plaintiffs asked the court to declare the fee inconsistent with the Constitution, the Electoral Act 2026 and other federal legislation, and therefore null and void ab initio.

They also sought a declaration that the fee contravenes Section 99 (2) of the Electoral Act, which bars use of state apparatus or regulatory bodies to advantage or disadvantage any political party or candidate.

Makinde and APM contended that INEC was exclusively empowered to make rules and regulations concerning political campaigns, relying on Item F, Section 15(a) and (f) of the Third Schedule to the 1999 Constitution and Section 99(1) of the Electoral Act 2026.

They argued fixing N200m fee amounted to using state signage agency to shut out non-incumbent candidates from public visibility, to the specific advantage of a ruling party better able to absorb such costs.

The suit also leans on Section 92 of the Electoral Act, which caps total campaign expenditure for presidential election at N10bn nationwide. Claimants argued if similar charges were replicated across states, cumulative billboard fees alone could consume more than 80 per cent of that ceiling, before travel, media buys, venue rental, security and payments to agents across over 176,974 polling units.

They maintained while outdoor signage regulation falls within states’ residual powers, that power could not be exercised to frustrate or override federal electoral legislation, citing Sections 1(3) and 4(5) of Constitution on primacy of validly enacted federal law.

The supporting affidavit was deposed to by Aisha Abdullahi Abubakar, described as APM’s National Welfare Officer, who stated claimants became aware of the fee while preparing for nationwide campaign tour covering 36 states and FCT.

The plaintiffs said unless court intervened, they would suffer irreparable harm to constitutional right to seek public office, and principle of level playing field would be undermined.