Lawyers have demanded the immediate withdrawal of a Bill sponsored by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tajudeen Abass, seeking to compel voting by eligible Nigerians in every elections. The lawyers described the Bill as not only unconstitutional, but also antithetical to democracy. AKEEM NAFIU reports

“This is a misconceived exercise. The right to vote or not to vote is inalienable. You can’t compel someone to vote or not to vote, it is not done anywhere in the world. “It is only in Nigeria that such a Bill has ever been sponsored.

It is sheer idleness on the part of the lawmakers, they don’t know what to think or talk about”, one of them said. Another one said: “I think it is wrong, immoral and unjust for the state to make any law compelling people to vote.

Voting is an exercise of a civic responsibility which can be honoured or abdicated because much is attached to people’s fundamental human rights. “So, if someone elects not to vote for one reason or the other and it is criminalized, it is going to enter the Guinness Book of Records as the most absurd law passed by any country globally.

No one can be compelled to vote because it is a right. Someone may chose not to vote”. The above were parts of submissions of some senior lawyers while speaking at the weekend on the emergence of a Bill sponsored by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tajudeen Abass, seeking to compel eligible Nigerians to vote in every elections.

The lawyers who are highly critical of the Bill called for its immediate withdrawal, saying it is an illegal and unconstitutional approach to tackling the problem of voters apathy during elections in the country. They noted that every Nigerian citizen of voting age has the right to vote and that there is no compelling legal obligation to do so.

The Speaker of the House of Representatives, Hon. Tajudeen Abass, had in February 2025 sponsored a Bill titled the “Bill for an Act to amend the Electoral Act 2022 to make it mandatory for all Nigerians of majority age to vote in all national and state elections and for related natters”. The legislation was aimed at addressing the issue of voter apathy during elections, while also enhancing electoral participation.

The Bill proposes imposing a maximum of six months imprisonment or a fine of no more than N100,000 for Nigerians of voting age who fail to vote during elections.

However, there are fears that if it becomes law, the Bill will infringe on the constitutionally guaranteed rights of citizens. For instance, Section 37 the Constitution provides that citizens rights to privacy is guaranteed.

It outlined that individuals have the right to make personal decisions in private, free from public interference It reads: “The privacy of citizens, their homes, correspondence, telephone conversations, and telegraphic communications is hereby guaranteed and protected”.

Court’s verdict on voting

In 2014, the Court of Appeal held that the phrase ‘privacy of citizens’ includes not just the choice of who to vote for, but also the decision to vote itself.

The court emphasized that citizens are entitled to the privacy of their decision to vote or not to vote for any candidate of their choice. Hence, forcing someone to vote, or compelling them to publicly declare their choice, would infringe upon their privacy rights.

The idea of jailing citizens for not voting is impracticable, unnecessary and unlawful

The appellate court made the decisions in the case of Nwali v. Ebonyi State Independent Electoral Commission (EBSIEC) & Ors. In this case, the appellant (Nwali) had challenged the public display of voting choices, arguing that such actions intruded upon his privacy.

In its verdict, the court held that the compulsion to vote publicly or the intrusion into the privacy of one’s voting decision violates the fundamental right to privacy guaranteed under Section 37 of the Constitution.

“The privacy of his choice of that candidate and the privacy of his voting for that candidate constitute part of his ‘privacy’ as a citizen. The appellant was entitled to the privacy of his decision to vote for a particular candidate, his choice of that candidate and his casting his vote for that candidate.

“Therefore, requiring or compelling him to vote openly in the public watch and knowledge by queuing in front of the poster carrying the portrait of the candidate he has decided to vote for intrudes into, interferes with, and invades the privacy of his said decision, choice and voting, completely removing that privacy, therefore amounting to a clear violation of his fundamental right to the privacy of a citizen”, the appellate court held.

SERAP’s litigation threat

In the meantime, a rights organization, the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has threatened to drag the leadership of the National Assembly to court if the contentious Bill is not withdrawn immediately. SERAP’s litigation threat was contained in a letter dated 26th March, 2026 to both the Senate’s President, Godswil Akpabio and Speaker of the House of Representativles, Tajudeen Abass.

The group, in the letter signed by its Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, urged the two men to “immediately withdraw the oppressive Bill which contains repressive provisions to jail any Nigerian of voting age for six months and/or impose a fine of N100,000 on them if they fail to vote in national and state elections”.

SERAP said in place of the Bill, Akpabio and Abbas should ensure an amendment of both the Constitution and the Electoral Act 2022 to remove constitutional immunity for state governors and their deputies who commit electoral offences, including vote-buying, to facilitate the investigation and prosecution of perpetrators.

The group also urged the two NASS’ leaders to amend the Constitution and the Electoral Act to explicitly prohibit the appointment of members of any political party as Resident Electoral Commissioners (RECs) of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

The letter reads: “Rather than proposing Bills that would severely punish Nigerians who may decide not to exercise their right to vote, the National Assembly ought to propose Bills to remove constitutional immunity for governors and their deputies who commit electoral offences and undermine the integrity of the electoral process.

“The most effective way to solve the perennial voter apathy is to create a safe and conducive environment, combat the impunity of high-ranking politicians who commit electoral offences, and generally improve the electoral process to encourage the citizens to come out to vote, and not to send them to jail.

“Should the National Assembly fails to drop the Bill prescribing a six-month jail term for eligible Nigerians who decide not to vote in national and state elections, and should any such Bill be assented to by President Bola Tinubu, SERAP would consider appropriate legal action to challenge the legality of any such law and ensure they are never implemented.

“The idea of compulsory voting and jailing citizens for not voting is impracticable, unnecessary and unlawful. The right to vote is part of citizens’ right to participate in their own government and the choice of whether to exercise it is personal. “The right to vote includes the right not to vote. If the right to participation is a right of the citizen, she/ he must be free to decide whether or not to exercise it.

“Because the notion of a democracy exists by virtue of the consent of the citizens, voters must get to choose how they exercise consent, not be forced to the polls like ‘cattle to the slaughter. “The National Assembly ought to propose Bills to reduce the influence of money in politics, and encourage and not compel the exercise of the right to participation.

“The proposed Bill is a blatant violation of the right to political participation, which is guaranteed under Section 14(1)(c) of the Nigerian Constitution, Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and article 13 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights to which Nigeria is a state party.

“SERAP also urges you to amend the Nigerian Constitution and the Electoral Act to include explicit mandatory provisions on internet voter registration, and the use of modern technology, including in casting and counting, voter registration and systems for reporting results.

“Amending the Nigerian Constitution and the Electoral Act to explicitly include the right of eligible Nigerians to vote and to vote securely would enhance the effective enjoyment of their right political participation and representative democracy. “It would rebuild public confidence in the ability of the National Assembly to effectively perform its constitutional responsibilities.

“Any amendment of the Nigerian Constitution and the Electoral Act must include Bills to address and punish governors and their deputies and their agents who commit electoral offences including voter suppression, voter intimidation and the destruction of polling units or theft of election materials.

“It is important for the National Assembly to introduce and pass Bills that would effectively rein politicians who continue to abuse the electoral rules to distort and undermine the right to participation with almost absolute impunity.

“Removing constitutional immunity for governors and their deputies who commit electoral offences would address the brazen impunity for electoral and human rights crimes which frequently characterise the country’s elections.

“The major problem facing the country’s democracy is the lack of  respect for Nigerians’ right to participation and the concomitant lack of trust in election results. If citizens do not believe in the election process, then the entire system of democratic government becomes a questionable enterprise.

“The crisis confronting Nigerian elections and lack of public trust and confidence in the electoral process can be addressed if the right of Nigerians to vote and to vote securely is explicitly recognized in the constitution as justiciable right. “Nigerians do not currently enjoy explicit right to vote and to vote securely.

Although the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended] provides in Section 14(1)(c) that, “the participation by the people in their government shall be ensured in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution”, this is not recognized as legally enforceable human right.

“Nigerian election laws ought to be such that would give effect to the electorate’s will and uphold the popular mandate through clean, fair, and honest elections. The right to vote in a democracy is important because so many other matters depend upon its exercise”.

Lawyers speak

Some senior lawyers have expressed deep resentment over the proposed Bill to compel voting by eligible Nigerians in all elections, saying it is unlawful and unconstitutional.

Speaking on the issue, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Chief Ifedayo Adedipe, described the Bill as a misconceived exercise. He declared that citizens’ rights to vote or not to vote is inalienable.

Adedipe said: “With due respect to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Hon. Tajudeen Abass, who sponsored the Bill, this is a misconceived exercise. The right to vote or not to vote is inalienable. You can’t compel someone to vote or not to vote, it is not done anywhere in the world.

It is only in Nigeria that such a Bill has ever been sponsored. It is sheer idleness on the part of the lawmakers, they don’t know what to think or talk about.

We have so many problems that the lack of coordinated leadership, elite consensus, vision and good politics have inflicted on the country. This makes it to look as if the country is on the same spot turning round and round.

The Bill is a blatant violation of the constitutionally guaranteed right to political participation

“This is a country that is capitalist in orientation, but claiming to be a social welfare state. We need to have elite consensus on some things, but certainly not on how to compel people to vote. I can understand the worries about voter apathy during elections in this country, but such issue cannot be tackled with this kind of Bill.

“In the last general election, when you look at the votes gathered by the three frontline candidates, the current Federal Government is a minority of the minority.

But, I think the government is trying to introduce some reforms, and I can tell you that I am in support of some of those reforms. But, introducing a Bill to compel people to vote is a lazy way to tackle the problem of voter apathy.

I do not support it and it has no support in the constitution”. Speaking in the same vein, a former Vice-President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Adekunle Ojo (SAN), faulted the Bill, saying it is wrong and immoral to compel people to vote.

“I think it is wrong, immoral and unjust for the state to make any law compelling people to vote. Voting is an exercise of a civic responsibility which can be honoured or abdicated because much is attached to people’s fundamental human rights.

“So, if someone elects not to vote for one reason or the other and it is criminalized, it is going to enter the Guinness Book of Records as the most absurd law passed by any country globally. No one can be compelled to vote because it is a right. Someone may chose not to vote. “I can tell you that I don’t see that Bill scaling the hurdles, except it is unduly influenced.

Even if it passed by the National Assembly, I don’t see the president assenting to it because it constitutes an infringement on people’s rights. “This kind of Bill is not what we need now. People need to be encouraged through orientation, sensitization and transparency as an impetus.

These are what will drive people to exercise their civic rights and not the other way round”, Ojo said. In his comments, another member of the Inner Bar, Seyi Sowemimo, said it is unconstitutional to coerce people to vote. The silk said: “I don’t think it is constitutional that people must be forced to vote. People have freedom of conscience and they may not neccesarily believe in the manifesto of any of the candidates or parties.

“So, the National Assembly cannot say people must be compelled to vote for something that doesn’t command their beliefs. I don’t know how the lawmakers came about that kind of Bill, when there are more pressing issues affecting the people negatively. “People should be encouraged to vote and they shouid be persuaded.

The way to do that is by bringing up interesting programmes that will make people be committed to the ideals of democracy. However, this cannot be achieved when people become non-challant by virtue of the fact that they have been alienated from the political process. They no longer see any merit in what is happening and in such situation you cannot compel anyone to vote.

“I want to advise the lawmakers to come up with laudable Bills that will impact positively on the lives of Nigerians, rather than this kind of Bill that will take us nowhere”. A law teacher, Dr. Fassy Yusuf, also spoke against the Bill, describing it as antithetical to democracy.

Yusuf said: “There is no democracy that wouid accommodate this kind of Bill. It is a misplaced priority. It is antithetical to democracy. The constitution will not even allow it because nobody can be compelled to do anything that is against his or her fundamental rights.

“To that extent, I will advise the proponents or the sponsors of the Bill to drop it and look for something more germain to the nation’s growth and development. This kind of Bill is anachronistic and against the norms of democracy.

Above all, it is against the fundamental rights of citizens. “All that the National Assembly needs to do is to ensure that Nigerians are mobilized to perform their civic rights and not to coerce anyone to vote”.

In his submissions, a Lagos-based lawyer, Ige Asemudara, said the emergence of the Bill is an attempt to deprive citizens of their conscience and freedom of expression. Asemudara said: “The Bill is nonsensical. The need to vote and be voted for is not just a political right, it is a component of the freedom of expression.

Therefore, a man has the right to vote and also the right not to vote. Within his right to vote, he has freedom of choice. This is because his vote is an expression of his desire, power as a citizen, thoughts and submission to a particular candidate.

“So, if there is a Bill intending to compel voting and prescribing punishment for defaulters, such a Bill is nothing but rubbish and an attempt to deprive citizens of their conscience and freedom of expression. Abstaining from voting is a right. It is also a choice. Any legislation that wants to take this right away from people is draconian and unconstitutional.

“What the lawmakers are saying with this Bill is that as an eligible voter, I should cast my vote, even when none of the candidates presented by political parties in an election appeal to me. This is nothing but an infringement on my constitutionally guaranteed freedom of choice”.