Human-rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria Femi Falana says a new bill that would force every eligible Nigerian to vote and punish absentees with six months in jail or a ₦100,000 fine conflicts with the 1999 Constitution.
The proposal, introduced by House Speaker Tajudeen Abbas to combat low turnout and make voting a “legal obligation,” ignores several charter guarantees, Falana argued Monday.
“I doubt that the speaker and his colleagues paid sufficient attention to the relevant provisions of the 1999 Constitution,” he said.
“Otherwise, they would have realised that compulsory voting is constitutionally invalid in every material particular on the ground that it is inconsistent with sections 37, 38, 77(2), 135(5), and 178(5) of the constitution.”
Those clauses, Falana noted, protect privacy, freedom of thought and conscience, and the right to register and vote voluntarily.
He cited Supreme Court precedents upholding personal choice, including Medical and Dental Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal v Okonkwo (2001), where the court affirmed a patient’s right to refuse blood transfusion on religious grounds.
Justice Emmanuel Ayoola’s opinion in that case held that “the right to privacy implies a right to protect one’s thought, conscience or religious belief … and a right not to be coerced into acting contrary to one’s religious belief.”
Falana also referenced the court’s decision supporting Muslim students’ right to wear hijab, underscoring the judiciary’s defense of individual liberties.
Beyond legal hurdles, he called the plan unworkable: “It is practically impossible to prosecute millions of Nigerian voters who may decide to boycott national and local elections.”
Instead of coercion, Falana urged lawmakers to revive substantive reforms recommended by the Uwais Electoral Reform Panel such as unbundling INEC, adopting proportional representation, resolving election petitions before inaugurations, and creating an electoral offences commission.
