2027 Elections: Opposition Parties Raise Campaign Funding Concerns as APC Defends Finances

Opposition parties have raised concerns about campaign financing ahead of the 2027 general elections, saying economic hardship and alleged political intimidation could make it more difficult to raise funds and compete with the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC).
Officials of the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC), Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Peoples Redemption Party (PRP), Young Progressives Party (YPP) and Obidient Movement Worldwide stated that they were relying on grassroots mobilisation, town hall meetings, digital campaigns, voluntary contributions and political alliances.
The debate comes amid higher campaign spending limits under the Electoral Act 2026. Section 92 sets a maximum expenditure of ₦10bn for presidential candidates, ₦3bn for governorship candidates, ₦500m for Senate candidates, ₦250m for House of Representatives candidates and ₦100m for state assembly candidates. The limits are ₦100m for Area Council chairmanship candidates and ₦10m for councillorship candidates.
The Act also provides that an individual or other entity must not donate more than ₦500m to a candidate. Contributions to political parties are subject to limits set by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), so the ₦500m figure should not be described as a universal cap applying identically to both parties and candidates.
The National Assembly defended the higher spending limits, citing inflation and rising campaign costs. Opposition officials, however, said limited finances and concerns about access to political participation could affect their ability to reach voters.
NDC National Publicity Secretary Osa Director said the APC had “bottomless resources”, but argued that its financial strength would not determine the election. He said his party was concentrating on town hall meetings and local structures rather than expensive rallies. Director also alleged that the ruling party failed to distinguish public funds from personal resources, a claim the APC has disputed.
For the Tanimu Turaki-led interim National Working Committee of the PDP, National Publicity Secretary Ini Ememobong said restrictions on political participation, intimidation and threats of violence were more pressing concerns than campaign funding. He said the party was relying on contributions from committed members despite its ongoing legal disputes.
PRP National Chairman Hakeem Baba-Ahmed said his party and other opposition groups lacked the resources to match the APC. He criticised what he described as the monetisation of elections and said opposition parties were developing strategies centred on policy alternatives, credible candidates and cooperation rather than cash inducements.
YPP National Publicity Secretary Martins Egbeola also cited the ruling party’s alleged access to state resources and the effects of economic hardship on fundraising. He said the YPP was adopting digital campaigns and direct voter engagement to reduce costs.
Obidient Movement Worldwide Media Director Onyeka Dike alleged that intimidation was discouraging potential donors. He cited the sealing of businessman Tobore Alex Agbah’s premises by Ughelli North Local Government Area in Delta State after an NDC march. Agbah alleged political motivation, while council chairman Olorogun Jaro Egbo said the action concerned alleged safety and environmental violations, including construction beneath high-voltage transmission lines. The council later temporarily unsealed the premises.
The APC’s National Director of Publicity, Malam Bala Ibrahim, rejected allegations that the party used public funds to finance its campaigns. He challenged opposition parties to provide evidence of money diverted from government accounts, arguing that the APC’s financial strength reflected its membership and ability to attract donors.
With the 2027 elections approaching, the debate centres on campaign costs, fundraising, political participation and the use of public resources. The allegations remain disputed, and claims of misuse of public funds require evidence beyond statements by political opponents.