Opposition political parties in Cross River State have kicked against the campaign advertising tariffs reportedly imposed by the Cross River State Signage and Advertisement Agency (CRISSAA), describing the charges as excessive, insensitive and capable of restricting political participation ahead of the 2027 elections.
The opposition parties, operating under the Coalition of Opposition Political Parties (COPP), reportedly made their position known in a statement signed by state chairmen of several political parties, including the ZLP, YPP, PRP, Accord, AAC, BOOT, NNPP, SDP, APM, PDP, LP, YP and ADC.
According to the report, the controversy centres on proposed charges for political campaign materials displayed across the state.
The figures cited by the coalition are N150 million for presidential candidates, N100 million for governorship candidates, N50 million for senatorial candidates, N25 million for House of Representatives candidates and N5 million for House of Assembly candidates.
The opposition parties argue that such financial requirements could make political advertising difficult for candidates and parties without substantial financial backing.
They maintained that campaign advertising is an important part of the democratic process because it provides political parties and candidates with an avenue to communicate their programmes, policies and messages to voters.
For the coalition, the issue is not simply about the cost of putting up posters and banners but about the wider question of whether candidates should be able to participate competitively in the political process regardless of their financial strength.
The parties reportedly argued that democracy should be driven by ideas, programmes, competence and acceptance by voters rather than the financial capacity of candidates.
The timing of the disagreement has also added political significance, coming as political actors across Cross River State begin preparations for the 2027 general elections.
The opposition coalition warned that the tariff regime, if implemented without review, could create what it described as an uneven playing field between well-funded political actors and smaller opposition parties or less financially endowed candidates.
The parties therefore questioned the legal and regulatory basis for the proposed charges and demanded clarification on how the figures were arrived at.
They also want explanations on why political parties were reportedly not consulted before tariffs were introduced, as well as details of the services covered by the payments and the period for which each charge would apply.
COPP called on the Cross River State Government and CRISSAA to suspend and review the proposed charges pending consultations with registered political parties and other stakeholders.
The coalition also urged civil society organisations, professional bodies, religious organisations, youth and women's groups and other residents of the state to take an interest in the issue, arguing that the political environment ahead of 2027 should remain transparent and accessible.
The parties called for dialogue rather than what they described as unilateral measures capable of creating tension within the state's political space.
For Cross River's emerging 2027 political contest, the dispute could become another major point of debate over the cost of political participation, especially for candidates seeking to challenge established political structures.
The immediate question now is whether CRISSAA and the Cross River State Government will defend the proposed tariffs, provide further clarification on their basis, or open discussions with the opposition parties over a possible review.
The development places the state's signage authority and political actors at the centre of a growing conversation: how much should it cost a candidate to be visible in an election, and at what point do regulatory charges become a barrier to political competition?
Post A Comment: