A directive by President Bola Tinubu requiring political appointees to resign ahead of the 2027 elections has triggered legal scrutiny over its interpretation and timing.
On March 17, the president instructed all serving appointees seeking elective offices to vacate their positions on or before March 31, citing provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026 and the timetable released by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
The directive was conveyed in a circular signed by the secretary to the government of the federation, George Akume, who stated that the decision aligned with section 88(1) of the law and preparations for party primaries.
Following the announcement, some members of the cabinet, including the minister of foreign affairs, Yusuf Tuggar, and the minister of transportation, Said Alkali, stepped down to pursue governorship ambitions in their respective states.
While the directive appears aimed at ensuring compliance with electoral guidelines, legal interpretations of the cited provisions suggest that the law does not explicitly fix a resignation deadline.
Section 88(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026 provides that “a political appointee at any level shall not be a voting delegate or be voted for at the convention, congress, and primaries of any political party for the nomination of candidates for any election”.
The provision establishes a restriction on participation in party primaries while holding public office, but it does not stipulate a specific date by which resignation must occur.
Legal analysts note that the absence of a defined timeline means the requirement is tied more to participation status during primaries than to a pre-determined deadline.
The electoral timetable released by the INEC scheduled party primaries between April 23 and May 30, 2026, in accordance with section 84 of the same Act.
Section 84(1) states that “a political party seeking to nominate candidates for elections under this Act shall hold primaries for aspirants to all elective positions, which shall be monitored by the Commission”.
Together, the provisions indicate that political appointees must not be in office at the time of party primaries if they intend to contest.
However, they do not prescribe a uniform resignation window, leaving room for administrative interpretation by the executive.
Observers say the March 31 deadline may serve as a precautionary buffer to separate official duties from political activities ahead of the primaries.
A similar development occurred under former president Muhammadu Buhari during preparations for the 2023 elections, when political appointees were eventually directed to resign after initial delays.
At the time, concerns had been raised over the dual roles of appointees who were actively campaigning while still in office.
Providing further clarification, a member of the house of representatives, Cyril Hart, said the Electoral Act does not mandate a fixed resignation date for political appointees.
According to him, the law only requires that such individuals must not participate in party primaries while still occupying public office.
He explained that resignation could technically occur shortly before the primaries, provided the individual is no longer in office at the time of participation.
The lawmaker described the president’s directive as an administrative measure rather than a statutory requirement embedded in the Electoral Act.
He noted that while the directive may promote order and clarity, it does not derive its authority directly from the wording of section 88(1).
The development has therefore placed focus on the distinction between legal provisions and executive directives within Nigeria’s electoral framework.
It also highlights the broader issue of how political transitions are managed within the constraints of existing laws.
As the 2027 electoral cycle gathers momentum, further clarifications may emerge on the application of the Electoral Act in relation to public office holders seeking elective positions.
For now, the directive stands as a policy decision guiding appointees, even as legal interpretations continue to shape public understanding of its basis.
