The rising cost of political advertising is emerging as another financial hurdle for opposition parties in states ahead of the January 16, 2027 presidential and National Assembly elections, as well as the February 6 governorship and state assembly elections.
State governments are imposing billboard fees running into hundreds of millions of naira, threatening to price opposition candidates out of public visibility and raising concerns over a level playing field ahead of the 2027 elections.
With campaigns already underway, the fees have exposed a growing tension between state governments’ authority to regulate outdoor advertising and political parties’ ability to communicate with voters without prohibitive financial barriers.
Read also: 2027: Tinubu blames opposition for hunger, poverty, promises prosperity, economic recovery
The controversy has dealt a major legal blow to opposition parties in Enugu. On October 19, the Federal High Court in Enugu, presided over by Justice Mabel Segun-Bello, dismissed a suit by opposition parties challenging the state signage agency’s N150 million political advertising fee, ruling that the state legislature could regulate outdoor advertising.
The decision has heightened concerns over the impact of state regulations on political competition. The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has condemned the fees as discriminatory, while the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) has challenged the rationale behind the charges.
In Benue, where billboard rental rates range from N250,000 to N1.2 million monthly, opposition figures allege that prime locations in Makurdi have largely been booked by APC candidates.
Read also: Fractured opposition faces old dilemma ahead of 2027 polls
A Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) chieftain alleged that billboard operators were denying opposition campaigners access to prime locations, claiming the spaces were already unavailable.
Abia State has set the highest reported presidential billboard fee at N200 million, while Enugu, Kogi and Cross River charge N150 million each. Rivers demands N75 million, while Anambra charges N50 million.
The implications extend beyond advertising budgets. Under the Electoral Act 2026, presidential candidates face a N10 billion campaign spending ceiling, while governorship candidates are limited to N3 billion.
If Abia’s N200 million presidential fee applies across the 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), a presidential candidate would spend N7.4 billion on permits alone, consuming 74% of the presidential spending limit before paying for rallies, transportation, publicity, campaign staff and other electoral activities.
The figures raise questions about whether candidates without access to substantial financial resources can compete effectively, particularly as incumbents enjoy established political structures, resources and greater visibility.
In Kwara, allegations of political billboard destruction have heightened tensions, with the PDP accusing APC supporters of vandalising its governorship candidate’s billboards, while separate claims alleged damage to APC campaign advertisements.
However, Bola Olukoju, Commissioner for Communications, said all parties enjoyed equal access to the state advertising agency.
Read also: Opposition’s consensus bid hits rocks as Kwankwaso refuses to quit race
BusinessDay reports that the controversy cuts across party lines, with billboard regulation spanning states controlled by different political parties. Alex Otti governs Abia under the Labour Party (LP), Charles Soludo leads Anambra under the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), while the All Progressives Congress (APC) controls Enugu, Benue, Kwara, Rivers and Cross River.
The trend underscores how billboard regulations are becoming a flashpoint in the struggle for political visibility across party lines ahead of the 2027 elections.
Jackson Lekan Ojo, political analyst, warned that exorbitant billboard fees and the destruction of opposition campaign advertisements threaten democratic competition.
In a telephone chat with BusinessDay, Ojo also described claims that ruling-party candidates had secured prime billboard locations across states as an attempt to deny opposition parties visibility, arguing that such practices run contrary to democratic principles.
“Some ruling parties in the states have failed to deliver on their campaign promises and are afraid of defeat. That is why they are resorting to the cruel tactic of frustrating the opposition,” Ojo said.
Related News
