PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE DOCTRINE IN ELECTION PETITION CASES IN NIGERIA

Abstract

The substantial compliance doctrine refers to a legal principle used in Nigerian election petition cases to determine whether an election should be nullified due to non-compliance with electoral laws. It holds that an election should not be invalidated if the non-compliance is not severe enough to affect the overall outcome of the election. Under this doctrine, the election must have substantially complied with the relevant provisions of the electoral laws, even if there were minor irregularities. The key statute guiding this principle is Section 135(1) of the Electoral Act1 which provides that an election shall not be liable to be invalidated by reason of non – compliance with the provisions of this Act 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. While the doctrine aims to prevent unnecessary election annulments over trivial breaches, it is not without challenges or problems. The application of substantial compliance doctrine in election petitions presents several problems. These problems often involve judicial discretion, inconsistent interpretations, and potential for abuse. In this article, the writer has identified these problems. It is anticipated that this article will open flood gates of discussions on the topic. This will go a long way in strengthening our democracy.