Electoral Amendment Bill scales second reading in House of Reps

The House of Representatives has passed through second reading a bill to amend the electoral act.

The bill sponsored by Aisha Dukku was debated by the House and passed for a second reading.

Leading the debate on the bill, Dukku who is the Chairman of the House Committee on Electoral Matters said the existing Act is obsolete.

“Electoral laws appear to be out-dated and ill-equipped to adequately address the concerns that the very foundation of our democracy calls for. I hereby urge you all to support this Bill to further strengthen our electoral legal framework and our electoral system for the development of our democracy.”

During the debate, expenses on elections were the most contentious. The bill is proposing a new limit on election financing.

The bill is seeking to amend section 91 of the act by increasing the limit candidates can spend on elections.

“The maximum election expenses to be incurred by a candidate at a presidential election shall not exceed N5,000,000,000.00.

“The maximum amount of election expenses to be incurred by a candidate in respect of governorship election shall not exceed N1,000,000,000.00.

“The maximum amount of election expenses to be incurred by a Candidate in respect of Senatorial and House of Representatives seat shall not exceed N100,000,000.00 and N70,000,000.00 respectively.

“In the case of state Assembly election, the maximum amount of election expenses to be incurred by a candidate shall not exceed N 30,000,000.00.

“In the case of a chairmanship election to an Area Council, the maximum amount of election expenses to be incurred by a candidate shall not exceed N30,000,000.00.

“In the case of Councillorship election to an Area Council, the maximum amount of election expenses to be incurred by a candidate shall not exceed N5,000,000.00.”

In his contribution, the Minority Leader, Ndudi Elumelu said his N600,000 monthly salary cannot support N70million limit for election into the House of Representatives.

When the bill was put to question, the “ayes” had it.