- Opposition, Stakeholders Question Affordability of Political Advertising Charges as Candidates Face Proposed ₦30m for Assembly, ₦45m for Reps, ₦50m for Senate, ₦60m for Governorship and ₦75m for Presidency
By Princely Onyenwe | News Desk
OWERRI, Imo State — Public controversy has continued to trail the proposed political advertising charges announced by the Imo State Signage and Advertisement Agency (IMSAA), with concerns mounting that the fees, ranging from ₦30 million to ₦75 million, could place an enormous financial burden on candidates and restrict their ability to communicate their programmes to voters ahead of the 2027 general elections.
The proposed rates, contained in a press release issued by the agency on October 13, 2026, have raised questions about the affordability of political participation, the freedom of candidates to publicise their aspirations and the justification for demanding tens of millions of naira for political advertising through billboards, posters and other outdoor publicity platforms.
Under the announced schedule, presidential candidates are to pay a proposed ₦75 million, governorship candidates ₦60 million, senatorial candidates ₦50 million, House of Representatives candidates ₦45 million and State House of Assembly candidates ₦30 million.
The figures have triggered debate over whether the proposed charges are proportionate to the cost of regulating outdoor advertising or could make political visibility increasingly dependent on the financial strength of individual candidates and their sponsors.
Critics argue that although government agencies have legitimate responsibilities to regulate the placement of billboards, prevent environmental obstruction and ensure public safety, such responsibilities should not translate into financial barriers that make it difficult for less wealthy candidates and opposition parties to reach the electorate.
The controversy has also drawn attention to the distinction between regulating commercial advertising spaces and imposing substantial financial obligations on candidates seeking to exercise their political rights during an election campaign.
For a House of Assembly candidate, the proposed ₦30 million charge could represent a considerable share of available campaign resources. A House of Representatives candidate would face ₦45 million, while a senatorial candidate would have to contend with a proposed ₦50 million charge. Governorship candidates face ₦60 million, with presidential candidates at the top of the schedule with ₦75 million.
These sums would come on top of other campaign expenses, including transportation, mobilisation, campaign offices, media engagements, party activities and voter outreach. The actual burden would depend on the applicable payment conditions, the number of advertising locations required and whether the announced rates cover individual installations or broader advertising arrangements.
The potential implications for opposition parties are particularly significant because candidates with limited financial resources may struggle to compete with wealthier opponents if the cost of securing outdoor publicity becomes prohibitive. The concern is that candidates could be forced to divert money intended for grassroots mobilisation and policy communication towards meeting advertising-related obligations.
However, the announcement alone does not establish that IMSAA deliberately designed the proposed rates to disadvantage opposition parties. The central issue is whether the charges are reasonable, transparent, legally supported and applied fairly to all candidates, irrespective of party affiliation or political status.
The agency and the Imo State Government are therefore expected to clarify the basis of the proposed schedule, including the services covered, the applicable approval procedures, the duration of permits and whether the charges are final or subject to further review.
Questions have also arisen over whether the fees are payable as blanket charges for candidates seeking political visibility across the state or whether they vary according to the number, size and location of billboards and other advertising installations. Such details are essential to understanding the actual financial obligations candidates would face.
The wider implications extend beyond the candidates to the electorate. Political advertisements provide an avenue for aspirants to introduce themselves, communicate policy proposals, criticise government decisions and offer alternatives to voters. If access to prominent advertising locations becomes too expensive, candidates with fewer resources could find it more difficult to compete for public attention.
Nevertheless, the need for reasonable regulation cannot be ignored. Poorly positioned billboards, unsafe installations and indiscriminate placement of campaign materials can create environmental and public-safety concerns. The challenge for IMSAA is to demonstrate that its regulatory objectives can be achieved through a transparent and proportionate framework without unnecessarily restricting political communication.
The controversy comes amid wider national debate over the legality and affordability of political advertising charges. Reports have emerged of legal challenges to high campaign advertising fees in other states, including a reported dispute over a ₦200 million presidential campaign advertising charge in Abia State and a reported Federal High Court ruling concerning a ₦150 million campaign billboard levy in Enugu State. The precise terms and legal implications of those proceedings must be considered separately, as they do not automatically determine the legality of IMSAA’s proposed rates in Imo State.
The developments nevertheless underscore the importance of ensuring that advertising regulations are supported by clear legal authority and do not impose unnecessary financial obstacles on electoral participation.
In its October 13 announcement, IMSAA also unveiled a new logo and corporate identity, describing the development as part of its efforts to reposition the agency under the administration of Governor Hope Uzodimma. The agency said its reform agenda includes modernising licensing and vetting processes, strengthening environmental and public-safety standards, improving collaboration with other government institutions and promoting a more transparent, technology-driven regulatory system.
While these objectives may improve the administration of outdoor advertising, stakeholders will expect the promised transparency to extend to the determination and implementation of the proposed political advertising charges.
A clear breakdown of the fees, an explanation of the costs they are intended to cover and the publication of accessible application guidelines would help candidates understand the requirements and assess their financial obligations before committing resources to campaign publicity.
The Imo State Government must also consider the wider democratic implications of the policy, particularly the need to maintain a political environment in which candidates can compete on their ideas, programmes and public support rather than on their ability to pay substantial advertising charges.
As preparations for the 2027 elections gather momentum, IMSAA faces the task of demonstrating that its proposed schedule serves a legitimate regulatory purpose and can be implemented fairly across political parties and candidates.
The question confronting the agency is whether the proposed charges of ₦30 million for Assembly candidates, ₦45 million for House of Representatives candidates, ₦50 million for Senate candidates, ₦60 million for governorship candidates and ₦75 million for presidential candidates strike a reasonable balance between effective signage regulation, revenue considerations and the need to preserve fair political competition in Imo State.
For inquiries on this news report contact 9News Nigeria on +234 08036856526
