AN ASSESSMENT OF THE INFLUENCE OF MONEY POLITICS ON ELECTORAL OUTCOMES IN NIGERIA (2019–2023)

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background to the Study The growing concern about the influence of money politics on the stability and sustainability of democratic governance is a pressing issue in contemporary global discourse. Scholars and political analysts have increasingly focused on the pervasive threat that monetary influence poses to the conduct of free, fair, and credible elections worldwide (Corentin, 2016). The phenomenon of money politics is not recent; it is deeply embedded in the history of electoral practices across nations. For instance, as far back as 1883, the United Kingdom introduced legislative measures to limit excessive political expenditure and curtail financial misconduct among candidates (Babalola & Abba, 2017). Similarly, financial influence has long shaped the political landscape in the United States (Enejoh & Ekele, 2021). Africa, and Nigeria in particular, reflects a history where financial power has been instrumental in determining electoral outcomes. During the Second Republic (1979–1983), the use of money in elections was already an issue of concern. However, this challenge has grown more pronounced, particularly since the return to civilian rule with the inauguration of the Fourth Republic in 1999 (Adekeye & Abdulrauf, 2017). The Fourth Republic initially sparked widespread optimism, with expectations that democratic governance would deliver equitable development and improve quality of life in contrast to the authoritarianism of military regimes. Nevertheless, these hopes have often been undermined by widespread vote-buying and the manipulation of electoral processes through financial inducements, notably during the 2007 general elections, whose results were heavily criticized for lacking legitimacy (Akpan & Reason, 2019). Although the 2015 and 2019 elections showed signs of improved transparency, the pervasive role of money remained evident, indicating that financial influence in Nigerian politics is a persistent and systemic issue (Ojo, 2019). Since 1999, this trend has intensified, raising alarm over the manipulation of the electoral process by the political elite through financial means. Many Nigerians have grown increasingly disillusioned with democratic institutions, having witnessed unethical political conduct and a decline in institutional trust. Danasabe (2020), Ibrahim, Sani, Danladi, and Adamu (2015), as well as Ukase (2016), argue that political actors with vested interests have hijacked the electoral process, weakening the democratic structures intended to safeguard electoral integrity. In the Nigerian context, political success is often determined not by competence or policy platforms, but by financial muscle. Wealthy political sponsors—commonly referred to as “godfathers”—exert influence by funding chosen candidates (“godsons”), enabling them to ascend to public office and, in return, gain access to government contracts, bribes, patronage, and preferential appointments. This dynamic severely distorts democratic practice, as political power becomes the preserve of the highest bidder (Ibrahim & Abubakar, 2015). Aspirants without significant personal wealth or external financial backing are typically unable to compete effectively, rendering Nigerian democracy fragile and heavily monetized. Several factors have contributed to the entrenchment of money politics in Nigeria. These include a pervasive win-at-all-costs mentality, elite competition for state resources, political godfatherism, widespread voter ignorance, and inadequate civic education. These conditions have cultivated a political culture in which financial inducement outweighs competence, ideology, or performance. The implications are far-reaching: vote buying, electoral fraud, political violence, election irregularities, poor service delivery by elected officials, and stunted political and socioeconomic development. Critically, money politics undermines meaningful democratic participation. As voters become more interested in immediate financial gratification than in the long-term benefits of good governance, the principle of accountability is eroded. Elected officials, having secured their positions through financial inducement, often prioritize the interests of their sponsors over those of the electorate (Babayo & Mohammed, 2016). Furthermore, the monetization of the electoral process creates structural inequalities, favouring affluent candidates while marginalizing others who may possess superior qualifications but lack financial resources (Ojo, 2019). This systemic distortion fuels corruption and weakens the foundations of effective governance. Despite various reforms aimed at reducing the impact of money in politics—such as campaign finance regulations established by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)—monetary influence continues to dominate Nigeria’s electoral landscape. Against this backdrop, the present study seeks to evaluate the impact of money politics on electoral outcomes in Nigeria between 2019 and 2023. 1.2 Statement of the Problem In Nigeria, money politics has become deeply entrenched in the political system and has a profound effect on electoral outcomes. The excessive use of money to mobilize voters, secure loyalty, and manipulate electoral processes undermines the principles of competitive democracy and fair political contestation. When the path to electoral victory is determined primarily by financial capacity rather than by policy debate or public service commitment, the credibility and integrity of elections are called into question (Ukase, 2016). This monetized system of politics diminishes the essence of voter autonomy, as citizens are often induced or compelled to cast their votes based on monetary or material incentives, rather than informed evaluations of candidates’ qualifications or manifestos. Consequently, the ability to make free and rational choices is compromised, distorting democratic representation. Furthermore, the political system suffers significant harm from the domination of money politics. Candidates with limited financial resources are often excluded from the political arena, leading to a concentration of power among the wealthy elite. This dynamic fosters corruption, undermines institutional integrity, and reinforces existing social and economic inequalities (Ibrahim, Sani, Danladi, & Adamu, 2015). The persistence of money politics also contributes to political apathy among voters and erodes public confidence in democratic processes. Danasabe (2020) observes that many citizens view elections as predetermined by financial might rather than genuine competition, leading to increased disengagement and scepticism. Despite regulatory interventions, such as the enforcement of campaign finance laws by INEC, the influence of money remains a formidable challenge in Nigeria’s democratic development. The persistent failure to curb financial interference in the electoral process necessitates a thorough evaluation. It is in light of these concerns that this study seeks to critically examine the impact of money politics on electoral outcomes in Nigeria during the 2019–2023 electoral cycle. 1.3 Research questions The following questions have been carefully prepared to guide the study i.What are the factors that propelled the introduction of money politics in Nigeria? ii.What is the impact of money politics on electoral outcome in Nigeria? iii.What are the factors that poses as a challenge in curbing money politics in Nigeria. iv.What are strategies aimed at curbing the influence of money politics in order to promote free and fair elections in Nigeria? 1.4 Objectives of the study The broad objective of the study is to evaluate the Influence of Money Politics on Electoral Outcomes in Nigeria (2019–2023). The specific objectives is as follows i.To assess the factors that propelled the introduction of money politics in Nigeria ii.To analyze the impact of money politics on electoral outcome in Nigeria iii.To investigate the factors that poses as a challenge in curbing money politics in Nigeria. iv.To recommend strategies for curbing the influence of money politics in order to promote free and fair elections in Nigeria. 1.5 Research proposition of the study The stated proposition will further guide the study Null proposition: Money politics have not significantly influenced electoral outcomes in Nigeria Alternate proposition: Money politics have significantly influenced electoral outcomes in Nigeria 1.6 Significance of the study Findings of this study will be valuable to policymakers, particularly those involved in electoral reform. It provides evidence on the effectiveness or lack thereof of existing campaign finance regulations and electoral laws aimed at curbing money politics. The insights gained can inform the development of more robust policies and frameworks by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and other stakeholders, with the goal of promoting electoral integrity. Findings of the study will also be significant to the academic community as it will contribute to existing literature, add to library resources and serve as a guide to future researchers. 1.7 Scope and limitation of the study The study focus on the Influence of Money Politics on Electoral Outcomes in Nigeria (2019–2023). Empirically, the study will assess the factors that propelled the introduction of money politics in Nigeria, analyze the impact of money politics on electoral outcome in Nigeria, investigate the factors that poses as a challenge in curbing money politics in Nigeria and proffer recommendation aimed at eradicating money politics in Nigeria. Furthermore, like in every human endeavour, the researchers encountered slight constraints while carrying out the study. The significant constraint are: Time: The researcher encountered time constraint as the researcher had to carry out this research along side other academic activities such as attending lectures and other educational activities required of her. Finance: The researcher incurred more financial expenses in carrying out this study such as typesetting, printing, sourcing for relevant materials, literature, or information and in the data collection process. Availability of Materials: The researcher encountered challenges in sourcing for literature in this study. The scarcity of literature on the subject due to the nature of the discourse was a limitation to this study. 1.8 Methodology of the study Research methodology deals with the different ways or methods the researcher applied in order to carry out the research as well as the instrument used for gathering the data. There are several research methodologies appropriate for answering the research questions. The type of research methodology used in this research to gather data and relevant information is the historical research and the study will adopt descriptive method of data collection. This will involve the collection of materials from secondary sources, such as books, journal articles, magazines, internet sources, international and national conference proceedings, published and unpublished articles. 1.9 Definition of terms Money Politics: The use of financial resources to influence electoral outcomes, typically through vote-buying, bribery, and excessive campaign spending by political candidates and parties to sway voters and manipulate the electoral process. Electoral Outcomes: The results of elections, including the selection of public officeholders, voter turnout, and the credibility of the electoral process. It refers to the final impact of all voting activities. Vote-buying: The illegal practice of offering money or material incentives to voters in exchange for their votes during an election. It is a common form of corruption in many political systems. Campaign Spending: The financial resources expended by political parties or candidates during the election campaign, including advertising, rallies, logistics, and voter mobilization efforts. Electoral Integrity: The adherence to democratic principles and processes during elections, ensuring that elections are free, fair, transparent, and credible, without interference or manipulation. Voter Behavior: The decision-making processes of voters during an election, including the factors that influence their choices, such as candidates' policies, campaign messages, or external inducements like money politics. Political Participation: The involvement of citizens in political processes, including voting, campaigning, or running for public office. In the context of this study, it refers to how financial inducements affect citizens' involvement in elections. Electoral Violence: Acts of physical intimidation, threats, or harm that occur during electoral processes, often triggered by political competition, including money politics, to influence or suppress voter participation or election outcomes. 1.10 Organization of study The study on the impact of money politics on electoral outcomes in Nigeria (2019-2023) will consist of five chapters. Chapter one comprised background of the of the study and a general introduction to the work. It included statement of problem of the study, highlighted the objectives of the study, the scope within which the research was conducted is also highlighted. An outline of how the work is organized is also detailed in the chapter one. The chapter two of the study assess the factors that propelled the introduction of money politics in Nigeria. The chapter three analyze the impact of money politics on electoral outcome in Nigeria. Chapter four investigate the factors that poses as a challenge in curbing money politics in Nigeria and proffer recommendation aimed at eradicating money politics in Nigeria and the chapter five deals with the summary of the major findings, conclusion and recommendation to the study.