CHAPTER TWO

CONCEPTUAL, THEORETICAL AND LEGAL

FRAMEWORK

2.1 CONCEPTS

Misunderstandings, tensions, and conflicts can emerge among candidates,

political parties, and their supporters not only on election day and when

results are declared, but also throughout the pre-election phase. 1 One

candidate might claim that an opposing candidate has breached campaign

regulations, or a party member could assert that another party has

intimidated a group of voters.2 Given that elections are inherently

competitive, such disputes are anticipated. Nevertheless, if these issues are

not adequately managed, political tensions may intensify. Some conflicts

may stem from deep-rooted societal issues and divisions that existed prior

to—but become evident during—the electoral process.3 Occasionally,

election violations, including the destruction of campaign materials,

disruptions at political rallies, hate speech both online and offline, and the

1
Ogunleye, T. A., “ADR and Political Party Disputes in Nigeria” (2019) 12 Journal of
politics 88.

2
2 Kovick, D. & Young, J.H. (2011) Alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. In C. Vickery
(Ed.), Guidelines for understanding, adjudicating, and resolving disputes in elections
(GUARDE) (p. 257). IFES.
3
Ibid
misuse of state resources by incumbent candidates, may go unaddressed

until long after the elections have concluded (if they are addressed at all). 4

It is against this backdrop that this chapter shall itemize and discuss in

details some of the concepts, theories and legal framework that shape

Alternative Dispute Resolution in regards to pre and post election matters.

2.1.1 MEANING AND NATURE OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE

RESOLUTION (ADR): Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) encompasses

a variety of processes, techniques, and methods aimed at settling disputes

outside the conventional litigation framework, including negotiation,

mediation, conciliation, or arbitration. The term "alternative" signifies that

these approaches serve as substitutes for the formal legal system in dispute

resolution. In recent years, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods

have gained significant traction as a way to address conflicts outside the

traditional judicial system. Although ADR is not a novel idea, having been

utilized in different forms throughout history, it is recognized for being a

cost-effective and time-efficient alternative to litigation. Moreover, ADR

mechanisms have demonstrated the ability to enhance control and

involvement of the parties engaged in the dispute. Consequently, ADR can

serve as an effective means for resolving conflicts and improving access to

justice for both individuals and party members. Nonetheless, it is crucial to

thoroughly assess the effectiveness of ADR mechanisms and weigh potential

4
Ibid
disadvantages before fully adopting them as a remedy for the challenges

associated with dispute resolution.5

The notion of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) has been articulated and

analyzed by numerous scholars. For instance, the United Nations

Development Programme (UNDP) characterizes ADR as "a variety of

dispute resolution techniques that offer parties alternatives to the

conventional legal framework"6 In a similar vein, the International Bar

Association (IBA) describes ADR as "a set of methods for settling disputes

that exclude litigation.7

2.1.2 TYPES OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTES RESOLUTION (ADR)

There are various types of Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanisms used

depending on the various reasons and means available for the parties

involved. The following are the major ones as discussed below:

[Link] ARBITRATION: Arbitration is a procedure in which the involved

parties consent to settle their dispute by presenting the issue to a neutral

third party, known as an arbitrator, for resolution. In the course of an

arbitration hearing, both parties, accompanied by their respective legal

representatives, will articulate their arguments to the arbitrator. The

arbitrator is tasked with rendering a binding decision based on the merits of

the case, meaning that the parties are obligated to comply with the

5
Drishti IAS. (n.d.). Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms. Retrieved from
[Link]
6
Ibid
7
Ibid
arbitrator's ruling. Arbitration is a binding procedure wherein a neutral

arbitrator issues an enforceable award following the consideration of the

parties' submissions. The arbitration process is structured as follows; the

parties reach an agreement on the arbitrator(s) and the rules that will

govern the arbitration; hearings consist of the presentation of evidence and

arguments, culminating in an award. In contrast to mediation, arbitration is

a formal and binding process, regulated by the stipulations. 8

In the case of BCC Tropical Nig Ltd v Govt of Yobe State 9, the Court of

Appeal affirmed the validity of an arbitration clause, highlighting its

separability from the main contract: An arbitration clause is a provision

included in a contract that mandates compulsory arbitration in the event of

disputes regarding rights and obligations under that contract. The intent of

this clause is to prevent the need for litigation over potential disputes. The

principle is that the arbitration clause and the contract that incorporates it

are two separate agreements10. The arbitration clause embodies the parties'

commitment to resolve both current and future disputes through

arbitration. The contract that references the arbitration clause serves as the

foundational agreement. Therefore, an arbitration agreement within a

contract is distinct from the contract itself. As a result, if the foundational

contract is rendered void due to illegality, the arbitration clause may still

remain valid, as the illegality of the foundational contract does not

8
As outlined in sections 1 to 66 of the Arbitration and Mediation Act, 2023.
9
(2019) NWLR 8 654
10
Ibid
invalidate the arbitration agreement. The arbitration agreement and the

foundational contract do not necessarily have to rise and fall together. 11

[Link] MEDIATION: Mediation serves as an alternative dispute resolution

(ADR) approach that has recently gained traction due to its voluntary and

confidential characteristics, along with its cost-effectiveness 12. In

mediation, a neutral third party, referred to as a mediator, helps the

conflicting parties communicate and negotiate with one another to achieve

a mutually agreeable resolution. Unlike a judge or arbitrator, the mediator

does not impose decisions on the parties but rather facilitates the process of

arriving at a solution13. Mediation can be utilized in various types of

conflicts, including those related to business, family, and community issues.

Its informal nature often renders it a less daunting and more accessible

option compared to formal litigation.14

[Link] NEGOTIATION: This is a straightforward, voluntary process in

which parties settle disputes independently without the involvement of a

third party.15 The parties engage in discussions regarding their interests,

propose potential solutions, and formulate agreements. It is predominantly

informal, entirely controlled by the parties involved, and lacks any legal

regulation. Negotiation serves as a method through which two or more

11
Ibid
12
González & Johnson, Alternative Disputes Resolution: General Over and Insight ( Bern
Press, 2019) 698.
13
Ibid
14
Ibid
15
Drishti IAS. (n.d.). Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms. Retrieved from
[Link]
the-points/Paper2/alternative-dispute-resolution-adr-
mechanisms-paper-2
parties arrive at a consensus on issues that necessitate their decision-

making.16 The resolution regarding the subject of negotiation is determined

solely by the two parties, rather than a third party. This characteristic of

negotiation sets it apart from other decision-making methods such as

adjudication, arbitration, and mediation, which require a third party to

render a decision for the involved parties17. This process entails discussions

between the disputing parties aimed at resolving their conflict. It does not

necessitate the involvement of a neutral third party. Negotiation can occur

in person, via telephone, or through written correspondence.18

[Link] CONCILIATION: Conciliation is a structured approach to resolving

disputes, governed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. 19 This process

involves a third party who intervenes to aid the disputing parties in

reaching a resolution. Conciliation is typically pursued when negotiations

have failed, as opposed to mediation. It aims to adjust and settle disputes

amicably and without hostility.20 This method facilitates the resolution of

conflicts in a mutually agreeable manner. In this process, a neutral

individual engages with the disputing parties to explore potential

resolutions. Conciliation entails a third party, known as a conciliator, who, at

the request of the parties, endeavors to bring them together to discuss the
16
Olawole, I. A., & Adegbite, S. A. (2017). Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms in
Nigeria: A Panacea to Court Congestion. International Journal of Humanities and Social
Science Invention, 6(2), 37-42.
17
Ibid
18
Ibid
19
specifically sections 39-42 and Schedule III of the Act.
20
Olawole, I. A., & Adegbite, S. A. (2017). Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms in
Nigeria: A Panacea to Court Congestion. International Journal of Humanities and Social
Science Invention, 6(2), 37-42.
issues at hand and achieve a friendly settlement. The parties may appear

before the conciliator in person and may also have legal representation.

Following an analysis of the case and after hearing from both parties, the

conciliator presents the terms of settlement to them. If the parties agree to

these terms, the conciliator prepares and signs a record of settlement 21.

This process encompasses reconciling, appeasing, uniting, and persuading

the other party. Conciliation serves as a dispute resolution technique where

a third party or conciliator (who may or may not be entirely neutral

regarding the parties' interests) is employed to foster positive

relationships.22

[Link] MED–ARB: As the name suggests, Mediation-Arbitration,

commonly known as "Med-Arb," is a method of dispute resolution that

integrates the processes of arbitration and mediation to address conflicts. 23

Med-Arb seeks to reconcile two essential yet somewhat conflicting

objectives of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): finality and

collaboration. Med-Arb endeavors to resolve disputes between parties with

the assistance of one or more neutral third parties by initially employing

mediation to settle the disagreement and subsequently utilizing arbitration

to address any unresolved matters24. This process may involve one or

multiple neutral third parties, including a Med-Arbiter or a combination of a

Mediator distinct from the Arbitrator. The decision to proceed to arbitration

21
Ibid.
22
Ibid
23
Ibid
24
Ibid
for issues not resolved during mediation is made by the parties beforehand,

prior to initiating the Med-Arb process.25

The mediation phase is primarily aimed at helping the parties reach a

mutually agreeable resolution with the support of a neutral third party (the

"Mediator"), who facilitates the proceedings. The Mediator conducts both

joint and private sessions with the parties, employing negotiation, problem-

solving, and communication skills throughout the process. 26 This approach

is characterized by its informal and flexible nature, largely governed by the

parties involved. Consequently, the Mediator serves as a facilitator without

the authority to make decisions on the issues presented, merely aiding the

parties in achieving a settlement. Among the advantages of mediation are

the active participation of the parties in resolving their dispute, the

expedited resolution of conflicts due to its informal and adaptable nature,

and cost savings, as it is generally regarded as more economical than

arbitration and litigation.27

Med-Arb, being a hybrid of both mediation and arbitration processes,

effectively combines the advantages of each. This integration allows the

parties involved to resolve their disputes through mediation while also

enabling a neutral third party (referred to as the "Med-Arbiter" or

"Arbitrator") to render a final decision on any unresolved issues from the

mediation phase.28
25
Ibid
26
Ibid
27
Ibid
28
Ibid
The Med-Arb process was initially designed with the Med-Arbiter fulfilling

the dual roles of both Mediator and Arbitrator. Over time, various

adaptations of the process have emerged, likely in response to some of the

criticisms directed at it. Certain adaptations involve the use of two neutral

parties, while others modify the sequence in which mediation and

arbitration components are applied.29

2.2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

2.2.1 CONFLICT TRANSFORMATION THEORY: The discipline of conflict

transformation became an established field in the late 1980s

and 1990s, having a distinctive theory, concepts, tools and models. 30

However, the roots of

the field go much beyond the 1990s and draw on the concepts of conflict

management

and conflict resolution. The conflict transformation school asserts that

conflicts are

always in a flux, in a constant state of change and the aim is to transform

them into

29
Ibid
30
Deborah Rhode, Access to Justice: An Agenda for Legal Education and Research, (2013)
62 J. LEGAL EDUC. 531.
something socially useful and non-destructive.31 Conflict, therefore is a

dynamic and

changeable process and the process which seeks to alter conflict must be

equally dynamic

and changeable. Conflict transformation also asserts that some conflicts are

better off

being transformed, rather than being resolved. 32 The theorists of conflict

transformation utilize a diverse array of conceptual components, some of

which are derived from other academic disciplines, while others are

longstanding, and some are more contemporary. The theories surrounding

conflict transformation embody various paradigms and encompass different

categories of interveners, including both state and non-state actors, as well

as internal and external participants. This theory posits that conflict

possesses an integrative quality, as it unites disparate and opposing forces.

It perceives conflict as a catalyst for social cohesion and creativity.

Furthermore, it asserts that conflict fulfills specific and beneficial social

roles.33

Consequently, conflict is not invariably detrimental to the relationships in

which it arises; in many instances, it is essential for the preservation of such

relationships. In the absence of mechanisms to express hostility and dissent,

31
Fiona McLeay, The Legal Profession's Beautiful Myth: Surveying the Justifications
for the Lawyer's Obligation to Perform Pro Bono Work, (2019) 05 INT. J. LEGAL PROF. 249,
259-600.
32
Ibid
33
Ibid.
group members may feel utterly overwhelmed and may respond by

withdrawing. By releasing pent-up feelings of animosity, conflicts play a role

in sustaining a relationship.34

Thus, conflict serves the purpose of preserving established social

connections. Additionally, it has another function: conflict not only fosters

the emergence of new norms and institutions but can also be said to directly

stimulate advancements in the economic and technological sectors. It has

been argued that conflict liberates individuals from outdated and

counterproductive behaviors, thereby serving a constructive social

purpose35. Another perspective that contributes to the understanding of

conflict transformation is structural theory, which encompasses the

concepts of conflict formation and its subsequent analysis.

2.2.2 ACCESS TO JUSTICE THEORY: Access to justice is a foundational

principle of any functional legal system and a central concern of modern

jurisprudence. The theory posits that legal rights are meaningless unless

individuals are able to effectively invoke and enforce them through fair,

timely, and affordable mechanisms.36 Traditionally, access to justice has

been equated with access to courts; however, contemporary legal thought

recognizes that justice can also be achieved outside the formal judicial

34
Ibid.
35
Deborah Rhode, Access to Justice: An Agenda for Legal Education and Research, (2013)
62 J. LEGAL EDUC. 531.
36
Ibid.
system. In this regard, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) has emerged

as a critical tool in advancing the objectives of access to justice. 37

The theory of access to justice gained prominence in response to the

inadequacies of formal court systems, particularly delays, high costs,

procedural complexity, and systemic congestion. In many jurisdictions,

including Nigeria, litigation has become an expensive and time-consuming

process, often placing justice beyond the reach of ordinary citizens. The

Access to Justice Theory therefore advocates for legal frameworks that

remove structural, economic, and procedural barriers preventing

individuals from resolving disputes. Alternative Dispute Resolution

mechanisms—such as negotiation, mediation, conciliation, and arbitration—

align closely with this theoretical objective by offering simpler, faster, and

more flexible dispute resolution processes.38

2.2.3 RESTORATIVE JUSTICE THEORY: Restorative justice represents a

contemporary movement within the domains of victimology and criminology.

It recognizes that crime inflicts harm on individuals and communities,

advocating for justice to mend those harms and allowing the involved

parties to engage in that process. 39 Consequently, restorative justice

37
M. Cappelletti and B. Garth, Access to Justice: The Worldwide Movement to Make Rights
Effective (1978) 1–15.

38
O. Aina, ‘Alternative Dispute Resolution and the Nigerian Legal System’ (2015) 9
Nigerian Law Journal 45.

39
Ibid
programs facilitate the direct involvement of the victim, the offender, and

community members in addressing the crime. These individuals become

pivotal to the criminal justice system, with governmental and legal

professionals acting as facilitators in a framework that seeks to ensure

offender accountability, victim reparation, and comprehensive participation

from the victim, offender, and community40. The restorative approach, which

often includes face-to-face meetings among all parties, serves as an

effective means of tackling not only the tangible and physical damages

caused by crime but also the social, psychological, and relational harms. In

instances where a party is unable or unwilling to partake in such meetings,

alternative methods can be employed to achieve the restorative goal of

healing the harm. To address offender accountability, these methods may

encompass restitution, community service, and various reparative

sentences. For victim and offender reintegration, they may involve material,

emotional, and spiritual support and assistance41.

A definition of restorative justice that highlights the significance of both

restorative processes and outcomes is as follows: Restorative justice is a

theoretical framework that prioritizes the repair of harm caused or revealed

by criminal behavior. This is most effectively achieved through collaborative

processes that involve all stakeholders. 42

40
Ibid
41
Ibid
42
Ibid
Restorative justice distinguishes itself from modern criminal justice in

multiple respects. Firstly, it adopts a more holistic perspective on criminal

acts—rather than merely categorizing crime as lawbreaking, it

acknowledges that offenders inflict harm on victims, communities, and even

themselves.43

2.2.4 CONSENSUS DEMOCRACY THEORY: 44

Consensus democracy is a

model of democracy designed to find and create common ground in

pluralistic societies and to base decision making on consensus. 45 Consensus

democracies also seek to allow different political interests to share power.

Some features of consensus democracy include: executive power sharing,

proportional representation, a balance between executive and legislative

power, bicameralism (having two legislative bodies), and multiple political

parties. Instead of a “winner take all” system, executive power sharing

ensures that one party or group does not dominate the leadership position 46.

Proportional representation, reserving positions for minority membership in

proportion to their constituencies, ensures that no parties or groups are

completely excluded from decision-making bodies. Though consensus is the

aim, such measures seek to ensure that all voices are heard. Consensus

democratic practices can be integrated to greater or lesser degrees into

national and local governments, as well as in private decision-making

bodies, such as workplaces. The aim of consensus decision making is the

43
Ibid.
44
[Link]
45
ibid
46
Ibid
greater inclusion of a larger majority, resulting in a broader satisfaction

with outcomes.47

Consensus democracy is designed to correct for some of the problems in

majoritarian democracies, which rely primarily on simple majorities to

establish policies and to choose representatives. Majoritarian democracies

are “winner take all” systems, leaving minority voters with no input into the

outcome of the decision and no political representation. Majoritarian

systems sometimes make decisions based on narrow majorities; this means

that the will of large minorities is left out. Consensus democracy seeks to

include the will of more people, arguably making consensus democracies

more properly democratic.

Consensus democratic practices have several advantages. Increased

consensus can enhance unity and decrease divisiveness. Participants in

consensual processes tend to be more hopeful that their interests will be

taken into account, therefore increasing participation. As a result of this

participation, decision makers will likely feel a greater sense of commitment

to the outcome. When processes aim at consensus, more information is

generally gathered and more perspectives weighed and taken seriously,

because a plurality of views is a part of the discussion. In addition,

consensus democracies tend to reduce antagonism between opposing

groups, in part because through the consensus-building process

participants become less-wedded-to and less sure of their viewpoints.

47
Ibid.
2.2.5 INTEREST-BASED NEGOTIATION THEORY48: This is also called "

Integrative bargaining or interest-based bargaining," "win-win bargaining")

is a negotiation strategy in which parties collaborate to find a "win-win"

solution to their dispute. This strategy focuses on developing mutually

beneficial agreements based on the interests of the disputants. Interests

include the needs, desires, concerns, and fears important to each side. They

are the underlying reasons why people become involved in a conflict.

Integrative refers to the potential for the parties' interests to be [combined]

in ways that create joint value or enlarge the pie. Potential for integration

only exists when there are multiple issues involved in the negotiation. This

is because the parties must be able to make trade-offs across issues in order

for both sides to be satisfied with the outcome.

Integrative bargaining is important because it usually produces more

satisfactory outcomes for the parties involved than does positional

bargaining. Positional bargaining is based on fixed, opposing viewpoints

(positions) and tends to result in compromise or no agreement at all.

Oftentimes, compromises do not efficiently satisfy the true interests of the

disputants. Instead, compromises simply split the difference between the

two positions, giving each side half of what they want. Creative, integrative

solutions, on the other hand, can potentially give everyone all of what they

want.

48
[Link]
2.3 ELECTION CONCEPTS

2.3.1 ELECTION:49 This is a method of choosing leaders or making

decision by a process of voting. It is the process of selecting a person or

persons for office through voting. Election remains the most democratic

way of choosing leaders, because the people themselves choose who will

rule them.

2.3.2 PRE -ELECTION MATTERS50: Pre-election matters occur from

preparations towards the general election. In other words, pre-election

matters are, as the name implies, matters that occurred before the general

election itself.51 They are live issues that must be heard and a judgment

delivered. Litigations arising from party primaries, e.g., substitution of

candidates. Complaints about the conduct of primaries are pre-election

matters. Therefore, a number of matters arising from disputes which arise

before the General Election are referred to as pre-election matters. 52 The

following matters have been classified by the courts as pre-election matters:

nomination of candidates, double nomination of a candidate, disqualification

of a candidate, wrongful substitution of a successful candidate’s name by

the Electoral Body, wrongful omission of a successful candidate’s name on

49
[Link]
50
Per Rhodes-Vivour J.S.C. in A.P.C. v Lere (2020) 1 NWLR (PT. 1705) 254 at 279.
51
L Diamond, Developing Democracy: Toward Consolidation (Johns Hopkins University
Press 1999)
65–72.
52
Ibid.
the register, complaints about the conduct of primaries, false declaration

on oath about particulars of a candidate.53

2.3.3 POST- ELECTION MATTERS: As discussed earlier, pre-election

matters are causes that originate prior to election. By contrast, post-

election matters arise from the election and are founded on alleged

irregularities in the conduct of the election.54 And these matters include

disqualification of the running candidate at the time of conducting the

election, invalid election due to corrupt practice or failure to adhere to the

Electoral Act and that the running candidate not elected by the majority

votes cast.55

2.4 APPLICATION OF THEORIES TO ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE

RESOLUTION (ADR) IN PRE-ELECTION AND POST-ELECTION

DISPUTES : Pre-election disputes constitute a critical aspect of electoral

litigation in Nigeria. These disputes typically arise before the conduct of

elections and include conflicts relating to party primaries, nomination of

candidates, qualification and disqualification, internal party democracy, and

compliance with electoral guidelines56. Traditionally, such disputes are

resolved through formal judicial mechanisms. However, the increasing

volume of pre-election cases has overburdened the courts and often delayed

53
Ibid
54
S Mainwaring and T Scully, Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin
America
(Stanford University Press 1995) 1–4.
55
Section 134, Electoral Act, 2022.
56
R Katz and P Mair, ‘Changing Models of Party Organization and Party Democracy: The
Emergence of
the Cartel Party’, Party Politics [1995] (1) (5), 15.
the electoral process. In this context, the application of Alternative Dispute

Resolution (ADR) theories offers a pragmatic and justice-oriented approach

to resolving pre-election disputes efficiently and peacefully. 57 ADR refers to

a spectrum of dispute resolution mechanisms outside conventional

litigation, including negotiation, mediation, conciliation, and arbitration.

Theories underlying ADR—such as access to justice, consensualism,

restorative justice, and interest based negotiation, provide a strong

conceptual foundation for its application to pre and post election matters in

Nigeria.

57
Ibid
 1. Access to Justice Theory and Pre-Election Disputes: The Access

to Justice Theory posits that legal systems should ensure that disputes

are resolved in a manner that is affordable, timely, and fair. In Nigeria,

pre-election disputes often involve aspirants and political parties with

unequal resources, making litigation costly and exclusionary for less-

privileged contestants.58 Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanisms,

particularly mediation and conciliation, enhance access to justice by

reducing procedural complexity and financial burden. By providing a

flexible forum for dispute resolution, ADR allows political actors to

resolve nomination and primary election disputes without prolonged

court battles. This aligns with the constitutional objective of

promoting justice and fairness in the democratic process. Access to

justice in electoral matters is not limited to court access but includes

the availability of appropriate mechanisms for resolving disputes in a

timely and equitable manner.¹ Thus, it complements judicial processes

by ensuring that pre-election grievances are addressed before they

escalate into full electoral crises.59

58
Nwoye, C. C., Alternative Dispute Resolution and Access to Justice in Nigeria (Nigerian
Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, 2016) 45–47.
59
Ibid.
 2. Consensual Theory and Political Party Disputes: The consensual

theory of ADR emphasizes voluntary agreement and mutual consent of

disputing parties.60 This theory is particularly relevant to internal

party disputes, which constitute the bulk of pre-election matters in

Nigeria. Conflicts arising from party primaries, zoning arrangements,

and delegate selection are better resolved through dialogue rather

than adversarial litigation. Through negotiation and mediation, party

members can reach consensus-based solutions that preserve party

unity and political stability. The consensual nature of ADR aligns with

democratic values by encouraging participation, dialogue, and

compromise among political stakeholders. Accordingly, consensual

dispute resolution mechanisms are more suitable for politically

sensitive disputes where preservation of relationships is crucial.

Applying this theory to pre-election matters helps prevent

factionalism and post-election instability61.

3 Interest Based On Negotiation Theory: Pre-election disputes

constitute a considerable segment of election-related conflicts in Nigeria.

These disputes encompass issues such as party primaries, candidate

qualifications, zoning arrangements, and adherence to party

constitutions and electoral regulations. Aspirants who perceive

60
Ogunleye, T. A., “ADR and Political Party Disputes in Nigeria” (2019) 12 Journal of politics
88.
61
Ibid.
 themselves as being treated unjustly often turn to legal action, which can

disrupt party unity and electoral schedules.62 Utilizing interest-based

negotiation at this juncture allows political parties and aspirants to

resolve grievances internally. For example, while an aspirant may

publicly assert their desire to be recognized as the party’s candidate,

their deeper interest might include seeking acknowledgment, future

political inclusion, or guarantees of internal democratic processes.

Through negotiation, parties can reach agreements on compensatory

measures, power-sharing arrangements, or reforms that address these

interests without resorting to litigation. This strategy strengthens

internal party democracy and minimizes judicial involvement in party

matters.63

Furthermore, post-election disputes typically involve challenges to election

outcomes and declarations. Legal proceedings in election tribunals are

confrontational and often exacerbate divisions among political actors and

their supporters. Interest-based negotiation presents an alternative by

encouraging parties to seek settlements that maintain political stability and

uphold democratic legitimacy64. In some cases, candidates who feel

aggrieved may place greater importance on political relevance, public

recognition of their grievances, or future electoral prospects rather than

solely pursuing the annulment of election results. Although informal,

62
Ibid.
63
Ibid.
64
Ibid.
negotiated political settlements have historically played a role in fostering

post-election peace in Nigeria by alleviating tensions and averting

violence.65

4. Restorative Justice Theory and Electoral Harmony:

Restorative justice theory focuses on repairing relationships rather than

assigning blame. In the context of pre-election disputes, litigation often

creates winners and losers, deepening political animosity 66. ADR, on the

other hand, promotes reconciliation and political harmony 67. Mediation

allows aggrieved aspirants to voice their concerns and seek remedies

without alienation. This is particularly important in Nigeria’s pluralistic

political environment, where unresolved pre-election disputes frequently

lead to defections, violence, or voter apathy.68

2.5 REVIEW AND APPRAISAL OF RELEVANT LEGAL FRAMEWORKS:

Elections constitute the cornerstone of democratic governance, providing

the mechanism through which the will of the people is expressed and

political authority is legitimized. In Nigeria, the conduct of elections is

regulated by a complex body of legal instruments designed to ensure

credibility, transparency, and fairness in the electoral process. 69 These legal

65
Ibid.
66
Nwoye, C. C., Alternative Dispute Resolution and Access to Justice in Nigeria (Nigerian
Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, 2016) 45–47.

67
O. Aina, ‘Alternative Dispute Resolution and the Nigerian Legal System’ (2015) 9 Nigerian
Law Journal 45.
68
Ibid.
69
Badmus S., Civil Litigation in Nigeria (Congress Press, 2024) 445.
instruments form the legal framework for elections and define the rights,

duties, and obligations of electoral stakeholders, including the electorate,

political parties, candidates, and electoral management bodies. Against this

backdrop, some of the relevant legal frameworks regulating election

matters shall be reviewed as follows for better appreciation. 70

2.5.1 CONSTITUTION OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA

1999 (AS AMENDED): The Nigerian electoral legal framework is primarily

derived from the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999,

which establishes the foundational principles of democratic governance and

provides for the creation, powers, and functions of electoral institutions.

The most important law in Nigeria is the 1999 Constitution (CFRN 1999). 71

It sets the functioning of the government, detailing the powers held by

various branches and the rights of citizens, including the procedures for

conducting elections.72

The National Assembly, which comprises the Senate and the House of

Representatives, is empowered to legislate on elections for positions such

as the President, Governors, and members of both national and state

legislatures; however, it does not govern local government elections, which

fall under state jurisdiction. As stated in Paragraph 22 of the Exclusive

Legislative List within the Constitution, the federal government is

authorized to legislate on elections for the offices of the President and Vice

70
Ibid
71
Ibid.
72
Ibid, at p.432.
President, Governors and Deputy Governors, and other positions

established by the Constitution, excluding local government council seats. 73

The Constitution also addresses other elected roles, including those in the

Senate, the House of Representatives, and the State Houses of Assembly.

Since these roles are constitutionally established, the National Assembly is

permitted to legislate on who has the right to contest election results in

court, the procedures and timing for such challenges, and the authority

granted to election tribunals.

For elections to the National Assembly (Senate/House of Representatives), if

the Constitution provides for laws regarding: who may contest election

results; the circumstances under which a seat may be deemed vacant or a

term concluded; and the procedures the election tribunal should follow in

these instances.74

2.5.3 ARBITRATION AND MEDIATION ACT 2023: On May 10, 2022,

the Senate sanctioned the new Arbitration and Mediation Bill ("AMA"),

which was intended to effectively repeal the "Arbitration and Conciliation

Act" of 1988 ("ACA"). Subsequently, on May 26, 2023, the new "Arbitration

and Mediation Act" ("AMA") of 2023 was enacted into law by the then-

president of the country, Muhammadu Buhari75. This new legislation

introduces several innovative provisions that significantly modify the

73
Ibid.
74
See section 119 for instance of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria.
75
Olawole, I. A., & Adegbite, S. A. (2017). Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms in
Nigeria: A Panacea to Court Congestion. International Journal of Humanities and Social
Science Invention, 6(2), 37-4.
current legislative framework for arbitration and have the potential to

reshape the arbitration landscape in Nigeria. It signifies a pivotal moment

in the practice of arbitration and mediation within the country. 76

The purpose of this article is to emphasize the innovative provisions

contained in the recently enacted Arbitration and Mediation Act, 2023

("AMA"), which repealed the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1988, that

governed arbitration practice and procedures in Nigeria.77

One of the key innovations introduced by the Act is the stay of court

proceedings. Consequently, the Act now requires courts to stay proceedings

initiated in violation of the arbitration agreement upon the request of any

party, no later than when they submit their initial statement regarding the

substance of the dispute that refers the parties to arbitration 78. Unless the

court concludes that the arbitration agreement is void, inoperative, or

incapable of being executed, it is obligated to issue an order for a stay of

proceedings.

2.5.4 INEC GUIDELINES AND REGULATIONS: The Electoral Act

provides INEC with a legal authority to establish election guidelines.

However, they cannot simply write anything they wish. These guidelines are

required to be officially published in the Federal Government Gazette and

must outline explicit procedures for documenting election results—from the

76
Ibid.
77
Olawole, I. A., & Adegbite, S. A. (2017). Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms in
Nigeria: A Panacea to Court Congestion. International Journal of Humanities and Social
Science Invention, 6(2), 37-42.
78
Ibid
polling units to the final collation center where the winners are

announced.79

Therefore, when INEC distributes forms and instructions regarding the

tallying of votes, these are not merely informal recommendations. They are

legally binding—implying they possess legal significance. Failure to comply

with them could potentially invalidate the election. In contrast, other INEC

regulations that are merely procedural may be waived under specific

conditions. However, the stipulations mandated by the Electoral Act are

non-negotiable. They represent the essential framework. The First Schedule

of the Electoral Act authorizes INEC to issue not only guidelines but also

regulations and manuals to facilitate the implementation of the Act and to

manage its operations effectively.

The judiciary has consistently supported this function—as long as INEC

operates within the legal confines. In the case of Faleke v. INEC,80 the court

emphasized that INEC is empowered to govern its own processes under the

Constitution81, a power that is further supported the Electoral Act.82

Due to these legal provisions, the INEC Manuals and Guidelines are not

merely internal documents; they are regarded as subsidiary legislation,

which means they carry the force of law (albeit under the primary Act). In

instances of conflict, the Act prevails—without question. The law clearly

79
Ibid
80
(2021) NWLR 8 677
81
See section 160 of the Constitution.
82
Sections 73 and 71.
stipulates that if an action (or inaction) occurs that contravenes INEC’s

directive but does not violate the Electoral Act, that alone will not suffice to

annul an election.83

2.5.2 ELECTORAL ACT 2022: This significant Act was signed into law by

President Muhammadu Buhari on February 25, 2022, and took effect

immediately, repealing the previous Electoral Act, No. 6, 2010. 84 The

electoral act governs all election petitions in Nigeria except local

government elections in States. Each State (excluding the FCT) has its own

Electoral Law that regulates local government elections. Before any election

can be conducted in Nigeria, there must be an Electoral Act / Law in place.

The Electoral Act No. 13, 2022 was published in the gazette by the Federal

Government on March 29, 2022, in Volume 109 as No. 61 by the Federal

Government Printer located in Lagos, Nigeria, with the serial number

FGP/85/52022/650. The Act is structured into Nine (9) Parts comprising One

Hundred and Fifty-Three (153) Sections.85 Part One (1) establishes the

Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and assigns certain

functions to the Commission. Part Two (2) sets up the staff pool for the

Commission. Part Three (3) addresses the National Register of Voters and

the process of Voter Registration. Part Four (4) outlines the general

procedures for elections. Part Five (5) pertains to political parties and their

affairs. Part Six (6) discusses elections for the Area Councils of the Federal

83
Ibid
84
Badmus S., Civil Litigation in Nigeria (Congress Press, 2024) 445.
85
[Link]
accessed on 15th February, 2026.
Capital Territory, Abuja. Part Seven (7) deals with electoral offences 86. Part

Eight (8) covers the resolution of post-electoral issues by the Election

Petition Tribunals. Finally, Part Nine (9) includes miscellaneous provisions. 87

One notable significance of this act, is the establishment of the Independent

National Electoral Commission, which functions include carrying out voter

and civic education; enhancement of understanding of effective democratic

election procedures;88

To organize any referendum mandated by the Constitution or an Act of the

National Assembly; To compile, maintain, and regularly update the National

Register of Voters, known as the ‘Register of Voters’; To securely hold the

voters’ register; To oversee the activities of political parties in Nigeria. In

fulfilling its responsibilities towards political parties, the Commission is

required to provide the names and addresses of every individual registered

during the year within 60 days after the conclusion of that year to assist in

updating their records. This will occur upon the payment of the fees set by

the Commission. Before any political party receives the voter’s register for a

state, local government, or Area Council polling units, it must be certified as

an accurate copy by the Commission.89

2.5.5 POLITICAL PARTY CONSTITUTIONS: Political party constitutions

are foundational legal instruments that regulate the internal organization,

86
Ibid
87
Ibid
88
Ibid
89
Ibid
administration, and activities of political parties in Nigeria. They define the

ideological objectives of parties, membership requirements, leadership

structures, internal dispute resolution mechanisms, and procedures for

selecting candidates for elective offices. As private associations with public

electoral functions, political parties operate within the framework of

constitutional democracy and are subject to statutory regulation90. In

Nigeria, the legal basis for political party constitutions is found in the

Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) and the

Electoral Act 2022, which require political parties to conduct their affairs

democratically. Consequently, party constitutions play a central role in

election matters, particularly in pre-election disputes relating to party

primaries, nomination of candidates, substitution, zoning, and internal

discipline. For example, the Constitution of the All Progressives Congress

(APC) regulates membership, party organs, congresses, conventions, and

the conduct of party primaries. It provides detailed procedures for

nominating candidates for elective offices through direct primaries, indirect

primaries, or consensus, subject to compliance with electoral laws and party

guidelines. In election matters, disputes often arise from alleged non-

compliance with the APC Constitution in the conduct of primaries or

selection of delegates. Courts frequently rely on the provisions of the party

90
View of Peace Accord And Electioneering in Nigeria. NnamdiNnamdi Azikiwe Journal of
Political Science
[Link] › [Link] › najops › article › vi... Accessed on 15 th February, 2026 at
7:09 pm.
constitution to determine whether due process was followed, especially in

pre-election cases involving nomination and substitution of candidates.

2.5.6 ABUJA PEACE ACCORD / NATIONAL PEACE COMMITTEE

FRAMEWORK: A formal agreement aimed at ceasing hostilities and

establishing peace among two or more parties engaged in a conflict is

known as a peace accord, which may also be referred to as a peace

agreement or peace treaty.91 Peace agreements play a crucial role in

terminating hostilities and promoting stability within nations or regions.

Typically, these agreements encompass provisions for a ceasefire,

disarmament processes, power-sharing arrangements, grievance

mechanisms, and systems for dispute resolution and reconciliation. 92 They

frequently outline the terms and conditions for ending the conflict. There

are various methods to attain a peace agreement, such as direct

negotiations between the disputing parties, diplomatic efforts by

international organizations, and mediation led by external parties. When the

involved parties sign a peace pact, they commit to striving for lasting peace

and stability.93

An electoral peace agreement in Nigeria would yield significant and diverse

policy consequences. Nigeria has a history of electoral irregularities and

violence, which have often undermined democracy and raised doubts about

the legitimacy of elections. In this context, political parties and candidates

91
Carter Center, “Promoting Peace through Diplomacy: Case Studies on Peace Accords.”
(Oxford University Press 2015) 64
92
Ibid.
93
Ibid
entering into a peace treaty before an election can enhance the democratic

development and stability of the country in several ways. 94

One of the primary policy implications of an electoral peace deal is the

promotion of credible and peaceful elections. Before, during, and after the

election, political parties and candidates exhibit their willingness to resolve

differences amicably by committing to peaceful conduct. This can alleviate

tensions, prevent violence, and create an environment conducive to free and

fair elections. Moreover, a peace agreement can bolster public confidence in

the electoral process by demonstrating a commitment to upholding

democratic values and respecting the electorate's choices.95

A post-election peace agreement can also foster national unity and political

stability. In a country like Nigeria, which is divided along ethnic, religious,

and regional lines, elections often exacerbate existing divisions and trigger

civil unrest. Political actors affirm their dedication to peaceful coexistence

and national unity by pledging to adhere to the terms of a peace agreement.

This can mitigate post-election conflicts and promote reconciliation among

different societal groups.96

94
Hogland, Kanson , “Electoral violence: An introduction” (2020) Journal of Peace Research, 57(1):3-
14
95

96
Ibid