Doctrine of Substantial Compliance: An Enemy of the Petitioner & the Electorates in a Failed Election

Abstract

According to the Election Statutes – Electoral Acts - 2002 - 2010 and reinstated by Electoral Act 2022, an election shall not be liable to be invalidated by reason of non-compliances... if it appears to the Election Tribunal or Court that the election was conducted substantially in accordance with the principle of this Act and that the non-compliance did not affect substantially the result of the election. The doctrine of substantial compliance is an attempt by electoral legislation to save elections that have become in modern day Nigeria not only very expensive but brutally a warfare, from being nullified even when there is no strict compliance with the legal requirements, hence, a slight irregularity will not render an election void if the election had been conducted substantially “in accordance with the enabling law”. The historical cum common law position reinstated that the non-observance of the rules or forms which is to render the election invalid, must be so great as to amount to conducting of the election in a manner contrary to the principle of an election by ballot and must be so great as to satisfy the tribunal that it did affect or must have affected the majority of the votes or the result of the election. The researchers through the doctrinal methodology found that the doctrine have become in its judicial application an enemy to both the petitioner and the electorates in a failed election in the sense that it makes a mockery of the electoral system and election as the Electoral Management Body hides under it to commit all manner of atrocities. Moreover, it creates room for a lot of corrupt practices during elections by the political parties, party agents and INEC staff among others. We concluded nonetheless that inspite of all the adumbrated vices, the doctrine have indeed saved Nigerians from imbroglio and disintegration, hence we recommend its sustainability with Solomonic Wisdom by the jurists.