By Simpson Global Media News Desk
UYO, Akwa Ibom State The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has criticised political parties in Akwa Ibom State for failing to field any persons with disabilities for elective positions in the 2027 general elections, raising fresh questions about political inclusion, equal opportunity and the representation of marginalised communities in Nigeria’s democracy.
The Resident Electoral Commissioner in the state, Anugbum Onuoha, raised the concern during a press briefing in Uyo on Thursday, October 15, saying the commission’s records showed that no political party had nominated a person with a disability for any elective position in the state. <Cite refs={["turn923268search0","turn599132search1"]}/>
Onuoha described the situation as unfair and argued that persons with disabilities should have opportunities to win elections and serve in public office. His remarks came as political parties and election officials continued preparations for the 2027 polls, scheduled for January 16 for the presidential and National Assembly elections and February 6 for governorship and State Houses of Assembly elections. <Cite refs={["turn923268search0","turn923268search3"]}/>
The commissioner’s statement places the spotlight on a distinction central to democratic inclusion: making it possible for persons with disabilities to register, vote and access polling stations is not the same as ensuring they can compete for elected office.
While INEC is responsible for administering elections and facilitating participation, political parties play a decisive role in deciding whom to nominate. The absence of candidates with disabilities in Akwa Ibom therefore raises questions about party recruitment, candidate selection, political financing, accessibility and the practical opportunities available to prospective aspirants.
The commission has reaffirmed its commitment to an inclusive electoral process and said it is strengthening the capacity of election personnel to provide appropriate assistance to voters with disabilities during Permanent Voter Card collection and on Election Day. <Cite refs={["turn923268search0","turn599132search1"]}/>
However, the broader challenge extends beyond polling-day arrangements. It concerns whether citizens with disabilities have a meaningful opportunity to participate throughout the political process, including joining parties, seeking nominations, campaigning, standing for election and influencing decisions that affect their communities.
INEC’s concern over political representation
Onuoha’s remarks were direct: according to the state commission’s records, no political party had fielded a person with a disability for an elective position in Akwa Ibom. He said this was unfair to citizens who deserved the opportunity to be elected and represented in political institutions. <Cite refs={["turn923268search0","turn599132search1"]}/>
The statement identifies a gap in the candidate-selection process, but it does not establish why political parties failed to nominate such candidates. The available reports do not provide a party-by-party explanation, identify prospective aspirants who sought nominations, or document whether disability-related barriers affected particular nomination contests.
Those distinctions matter. The absence of candidates is a measurable outcome, while the reasons behind it require further investigation and responses from political parties and disability-rights organisations.
Possible barriers to political participation can include inaccessible party offices and meeting venues, insufficient campaign resources, discrimination, limited access to political networks, and assumptions about a person’s ability to hold public office. These are issues that warrant examination, not established explanations for the specific outcome in Akwa Ibom.
Political parties are the gatekeepers of candidate nominations in Nigeria’s party-based electoral system. Citizens may have the legal right to participate in public affairs, but their prospects of contesting an election can be affected by the practical requirements and internal procedures of the parties through which they seek political office.
The nomination process can involve screening, party membership requirements, primary elections or other legally permitted methods, fundraising, campaigning and the ability to mobilise supporters. If these processes are inaccessible or discriminatory, formal political rights may not translate into equal opportunities to compete.
Onuoha’s intervention has consequently brought attention to a stage of democracy that can receive less public scrutiny than voting itself: the selection of people whose names eventually appear on the ballot.
For voters with disabilities, representation can mean more than the availability of accessible voting facilities. It can also mean having opportunities to participate in political decisions, contribute to public debate and seek election to positions where laws, budgets and public services are determined.
Why representation matters
The absence of candidates with disabilities raises questions about whose experiences are reflected in political decision-making.
Persons with disabilities are not a single, uniform group. Their experiences vary according to the nature of their disabilities, their age, gender, location, economic circumstances and access to education and employment. They may also have different political opinions and policy priorities.
Electing a person with a disability does not automatically guarantee that every disability-related concern will be addressed. Like other elected officials, candidates bring their own political commitments and priorities to office. Nevertheless, equal access to political participation is important because public institutions should offer citizens opportunities to contribute to decisions affecting their lives.
Issues such as accessible public buildings, inclusive education, employment opportunities, transportation, healthcare access and social protection can affect persons with disabilities directly. Their experiences may provide valuable perspectives when governments consider policies, public spending and service delivery.
Representation can also challenge assumptions about leadership and competence. When people with disabilities are visible in political life, they can demonstrate that disability does not, by itself, determine whether someone can contribute to public administration or legislative work.
At the same time, the responsibility for disability inclusion should not rest solely on elected representatives who have disabilities. Governments, legislatures, political parties and electoral institutions all have responsibilities within their respective mandates to ensure that policies and processes do not create unjustified barriers.
The central democratic principle is that eligible citizens should have a fair opportunity to participate in public affairs. A political system that enables people to vote but offers limited practical access to candidate selection risks narrowing the range of voices that can reach elected institutions.
Voting access is only one part of electoral inclusion
INEC’s Akwa Ibom commissioner said the commission was strengthening staff capacity to provide appropriate assistance to persons with disabilities during PVC collection and on Election Day. <Cite refs={["turn923268search0","turn599132search1"]}/>
Such measures address an important aspect of electoral participation. Voters may encounter obstacles if registration centres, collection points or polling locations are difficult to access, or if election materials are not available in formats they can use.
Depending on individual needs, assistance may involve accessible physical arrangements, clear instructions, appropriate communication support, or voting materials designed for people with visual or other impairments. The appropriate arrangements vary by disability and must respect voters’ dignity, privacy and independence.
INEC’s existing policy framework for access and inclusion has identified measures such as assistive voting materials and adjustments intended to make electoral processes more accessible. Its implementation, however, depends on operational planning, staff training, materials, facilities and effective communication with voters. <Cite refs={["turn599132search8","turn599132search9"]}/>
Onuoha’s announcement that staff capacity was being strengthened indicates that accessibility remains part of the commission’s election preparations. The available report does not provide detailed figures on the number of personnel trained, the specific equipment available in Akwa Ibom or the accessibility status of every polling unit.
Those details would help voters and disability-rights organisations assess how the stated commitment will translate into practical arrangements.
It is also important to distinguish voting access from political representation. An accessible polling station can help a citizen cast a ballot, but it cannot by itself remove barriers encountered by a person seeking a party nomination or trying to finance a campaign.
Both dimensions matter. Electoral administration should facilitate participation by voters, while political parties should ensure that their internal processes provide fair opportunities for qualified aspirants.
Nigeria’s legal framework and the right to participate
Nigeria has a legal framework intended to protect the rights of persons with disabilities and promote participation in public life.
The Discrimination Against Persons with Disabilities (Prohibition) Act, enacted in 2018, establishes protections against discrimination and provides for measures to promote the participation of persons with disabilities in society. Section 30 addresses participation in public affairs and the role of government in creating an environment in which persons with disabilities can participate effectively and fully. <Cite refs={["turn599132search8"]}/>
Nigeria is also a party to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Article 29 of the convention addresses participation in political and public life, including the right and opportunity of persons with disabilities to vote, be elected and participate in public affairs on an equal basis with others. <Cite refs={["turn599132search8"]}/>
These principles establish that political participation is broader than access to a ballot box. It includes the opportunity to stand for election, hold public office and participate in political and civic organisations.
The existence of legal protections does not automatically eliminate practical barriers. Implementation requires institutions to translate general commitments into procedures, resources and accessible arrangements.
For political parties, that means considering whether their membership, screening, nomination and campaign processes are accessible and fair. For electoral authorities, it means ensuring that registration, voting and other electoral services can be used by eligible citizens with disabilities.
Public authorities, political parties and disability-rights organisations can also help identify gaps between formal rights and actual participation. Reliable information about who seeks nominations, who is selected and what barriers aspirants face would help make the discussion more specific.
The available reports on Onuoha’s briefing do not establish that any party in Akwa Ibom violated a particular legal provision by failing to nominate a person with a disability. The commissioner criticised the absence of such candidates, but the legal and factual circumstances of party nomination decisions would need to be assessed separately.
The broader principle remains that disability should not be a basis for discrimination or exclusion from political life.
The responsibility of political parties
Political parties are central to the question raised by INEC because they decide which aspirants are nominated to contest elections under their platforms.
A party seeking to improve participation by persons with disabilities could begin by examining its internal structures. Are party offices and meetings accessible? Are nomination requirements clearly communicated? Can aspirants obtain the necessary documents and participate in screening and primary elections without avoidable barriers?
Parties could also engage organisations representing persons with disabilities to understand what prevents eligible citizens from entering party politics or seeking elective office.
Such engagement should not assume that all persons with disabilities have identical needs or that one policy will resolve every barrier. Consultation can help identify practical improvements in communication, venues, campaign activities and access to nomination procedures.
Candidate selection also involves political considerations, including public support, party organisation, campaign resources and competition among aspirants. Disability inclusion does not mean abandoning lawful nomination procedures or assuming that a candidate should automatically receive a nomination solely because of disability.
Rather, the goal is to ensure that disability does not create unfair barriers to competing under the same applicable rules.
Parties could also consider how they identify and support new talent. Outreach programmes, political education and leadership development can help broaden the pool of people who see elective office as a realistic possibility.
Where a party has no prospective aspirants with disabilities, it may need to examine whether it has effectively reached those communities and whether its structures are welcoming and accessible. Where aspirants do come forward but are unsuccessful, transparency around nomination procedures can help the public understand the outcome.
No such detailed findings were provided in the reports about Akwa Ibom. The absence of candidates should therefore be treated as a concern requiring investigation and constructive action, rather than proof of a single cause.
Campaign finance and the cost of political participation
Campaign finance is another area that merits attention when assessing equal access to elective office.
Running for office can require spending on transport, communication, campaign materials, meetings, publicity and mobilisation. The demands differ by office, constituency and political party, but the ability to obtain resources can influence who is able to compete.
Some aspirants with disabilities may face additional expenses linked to accessibility or personal support. The scale and nature of such expenses vary, and there is no evidence in the available reports establishing that campaign costs caused the absence of candidates with disabilities in Akwa Ibom.
Nevertheless, parties and electoral stakeholders can examine whether campaign activities and internal procedures create avoidable financial or logistical barriers.
A campaign meeting held in an inaccessible venue, for example, may prevent participation regardless of a candidate’s political experience or support. Communications that are not available in accessible formats may make it harder for some aspirants to receive information or engage with party members.
The wider principle is that fair competition involves more than applying the same written rules to everyone. Institutions also need to consider whether the way those rules operate creates unnecessary obstacles for particular groups.
Reasonable, practical adjustments can help make participation more equitable without changing the fundamental requirements of candidacy.
The role of disability-rights organisations
Disability-rights organisations can help connect prospective aspirants with political parties and election officials, communicate information about nomination procedures and identify accessibility concerns.
In Akwa Ibom, the Joint National Association of Persons with Disabilities (JONAPwD) was expected to participate in an INEC sensitisation programme alongside electoral officers and other voter-education providers on Friday, October 16, according to the News Agency of Nigeria report. <Cite refs={["turn599132search1"]}/>
The reported programme was intended to engage persons with disabilities on electoral participation. The available coverage does not provide a full account of its proceedings or confirm the outcomes of the engagement.
Such initiatives can create opportunities for voters and disability-rights groups to discuss registration, PVC collection, polling arrangements and the assistance available during elections.
They can also provide a forum for raising wider questions about political participation, although voter education alone will not necessarily resolve obstacles within political parties.
For lasting impact, engagement needs to continue beyond a single sensitisation event. Organisations representing persons with disabilities can document recurring problems, communicate recommendations to political parties and monitor whether commitments are implemented.
They can also encourage interested citizens to learn about the qualifications, nomination procedures and timelines relevant to elective office.
At the same time, it is important to avoid treating disability-rights organisations as substitutes for the individuals they represent. People with disabilities have diverse experiences and political preferences. Consultation should allow them to express their own priorities rather than assuming that a single organisation speaks identically for every person.
INEC’s wider preparations for 2027
Onuoha also provided an update on election preparations in Akwa Ibom, saying INEC had completed nine of the 14 activities on its timetable at the time of the briefing. He identified publication of the final list of governorship and State House of Assembly candidates as the ninth activity. <Cite refs={["turn923268search0","turn599132search1"]}/>
He urged political parties to comply with deadlines for submitting the names of polling agents to electoral officers across the state’s 31 local government areas.
According to the commissioner, the deadline for submitting polling-agent names for the presidential and National Assembly elections was December 10, while the deadline for the governorship and State Assembly elections was January 6, 2027. <Cite refs={["turn923268search0","turn599132search1"]}/>
The commission also said recruitment of eligible Nigerians as ad hoc election personnel had begun. Onuoha directed interested applicants to INEC’s official recruitment portal and advised them to rely on official channels for updates. He said the portal was expected to close on November 18. <Cite refs={["turn923268search0","turn599132search1"]}/>
The commissioner further reported that INEC had visited 23 of Akwa Ibom’s 31 local government areas for voter education and sensitisation. He said the commission had begun receiving some non-sensitive election materials and had tested the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS). <Cite refs={["turn923268search0","turn599132search1"]}/>
These preparations form part of the administrative work needed to organise elections, but their progress should be assessed separately from the question of political representation.
A commission can prepare voting equipment, recruit staff and publish candidate lists while wider questions about the composition of the candidates remain unresolved. Conversely, a more diverse candidate list does not by itself guarantee that voting will be accessible or that election administration will be effective.
Credible elections require several elements to work together: lawful candidate nomination, voter access, reliable logistics, trained personnel, security, transparent procedures and public confidence.
The commissioner’s comments have drawn attention to one dimension of that broader process which can be overlooked when public debate focuses mainly on campaign rivalries and election logistics.
Accessibility must extend across the electoral process
For persons with disabilities, meaningful electoral participation can involve several stages, beginning long before Election Day.
At the party level, prospective candidates need access to information about membership, nomination requirements, screening and primary elections. They must be able to participate in relevant meetings and obtain the documents required under the applicable rules.
During campaigns, they may need accessible venues, communication formats and arrangements that allow them to engage with party members, supporters and the public. The practical adjustments required will depend on the individual and the activity.
For voters, accessibility concerns may include registration services, PVC collection, polling-station access, understandable instructions and voting materials suitable for different needs.
The election itself is only one point in this chain. If barriers prevent people from joining parties, participating in nominations or campaigning, accessible polling arrangements cannot fully resolve the problem of political exclusion.
INEC’s stated plan to strengthen staff capacity for assistance at PVC collection and on Election Day is therefore relevant, but the broader issue raised by Onuoha requires action from additional stakeholders, particularly the parties responsible for selecting candidates. <Cite refs={["turn923268search0","turn599132search1"]}/>
Effective inclusion also requires feedback. Persons with disabilities should have ways to report difficulties and obtain clear information about how their concerns will be addressed.
Election authorities and political parties can use such feedback to identify recurring problems and improve procedures before they become barriers during the campaign or on polling day.
Avoiding tokenism while expanding opportunity
Efforts to increase political participation must also avoid tokenism.
The objective is not simply to place a person with a disability on a candidate list to improve appearances. Candidates should have a genuine opportunity to compete, communicate their policies and participate meaningfully in political life.
Nor should persons with disabilities be expected to campaign exclusively on disability-related issues. Like other candidates, they may prioritise education, healthcare, economic development, security, infrastructure, agriculture or other matters relevant to their constituencies.
Disability inclusion means allowing candidates to participate as full political actors, with their own priorities and platforms.
A serious approach would focus on removing barriers, improving access to information, making nomination procedures transparent and encouraging a broader range of qualified citizens to consider elective office.
Political parties could also review whether their internal leadership structures reflect the diversity of the communities they seek to represent. Such a review would not predetermine who should win a nomination, but it could help identify whether particular groups face avoidable obstacles before they reach the primary-election stage.
The available reporting does not establish whether parties in Akwa Ibom have conducted such reviews or whether any specific reform has been proposed in response to Onuoha’s statement.
What happens next?
The commissioner’s comments have created an opportunity for political parties in Akwa Ibom to explain how they approach disability inclusion and whether they intend to improve access to future nomination processes.
Because the final candidate list for the 2027 governorship and State Assembly elections had already been published by the time of the briefing, the immediate options available to parties and prospective candidates will depend on the applicable electoral timetable and law. The available reports do not establish that the commission announced a new nomination window or ordered parties to add candidates with disabilities. <Cite refs={["turn923268search0","turn599132search1"]}/>
It would therefore be inaccurate to suggest that INEC’s criticism automatically changes the published list or creates a new legal entitlement to a nomination.
The more immediate questions concern how political parties will respond to the concern, whether they will examine their candidate-selection processes and what steps they will take to make future political participation more accessible.
Disability-rights organisations may also seek clearer information about the obstacles prospective candidates face and how parties can address them. Further public engagement could help distinguish between lack of outreach, practical accessibility problems, financial barriers, nomination disputes or other factors.
Any proposed remedy should be grounded in the law and informed by the experiences of the people affected.
The commission, meanwhile, will need to continue implementing its voter-education and accessibility measures as preparations for the 2027 elections progress. The effectiveness of those measures will depend on what voters can actually access, not only on the commitments announced at briefings.
A wider test of democratic inclusion
The concern raised in Uyo is significant because it asks whether electoral participation is being understood broadly enough.
A democracy depends on citizens being able to express political preferences through voting, but it also depends on fair opportunities to seek public office and contribute to the decisions made by elected institutions.
INEC’s finding that no political party in Akwa Ibom had fielded a person with a disability for an elective position does not, by itself, explain why that outcome occurred. It does, however, provide a clear reason for political parties, election officials and disability-rights organisations to examine the situation more closely. <Cite refs={["turn923268search0","turn599132search1"]}/>
Nigeria’s legal framework recognises the importance of participation by persons with disabilities, including through the Discrimination Against Persons with Disabilities (Prohibition) Act and international commitments addressing political and public life. The practical task is to ensure that these principles are reflected in accessible services and fair opportunities. <Cite refs={["turn599132search8"]}/>
For political parties, that means examining how prospective candidates are identified, supported and nominated. For INEC, it means continuing to improve access to electoral services and ensuring that persons with disabilities can participate in the voting process. For civil society, it means monitoring progress, communicating verified information and helping make barriers visible.
The next stage should be based on evidence rather than assumptions about why candidates were absent. Parties can explain their nomination records, aspirants can describe the challenges they encountered, and disability-rights groups can contribute recommendations grounded in the experiences of their members.
Ultimately, inclusive democracy is not measured only by the number of people who can reach a polling station. It is also measured by whether citizens have a fair opportunity to become candidates, present their ideas and seek the trust of voters.
As Nigeria moves towards the 2027 elections, the issue raised by INEC in Akwa Ibom serves as a reminder that electoral preparations must include the people seeking to vote as well as those seeking to represent them. The challenge now is to turn concern about exclusion into practical, lawful and measurable improvements in political participation.
Comments
Post a Comment