A Federal High Court sitting in Enugu has upheld the authority of the Enugu State Structures for Signage and Advertisement Agency (ENSSAA) to impose a ₦150 million advertising permit fee on political parties seeking to erect campaign billboards in the state ahead of the 2027 general elections.
The judgment, delivered by Justice Mabel Segun-Bello on September 1, 2026, dismissed a legal challenge brought by opposition political parties and their representatives against the agency’s authority to impose the fee.
Details of the judgment emerged in a report published on Monday, October 19, 2026, amid conflicting accounts on social media suggesting that the court had nullified the controversial charge.
According to the report, a certified true copy of the judgment confirmed that the court ruled in favour of ENSSAA, affirming the agency’s authority to regulate outdoor advertising under powers delegated by state law.
The ruling has significant implications for political parties preparing for the 2027 elections, particularly regarding the financial and regulatory requirements for campaign visibility in Enugu State.
Political Parties Had Challenged the ₦150m Fee
The legal action was instituted by the Labour Party, the Nigeria Democratic Congress and the Social Democratic Party, alongside their respective state representatives.
The plaintiffs approached the court in June 2026, seeking a declaration that ENSSAA and its General Manager lacked the authority to impose a mandatory ₦150 million advertising permit fee on political parties and their candidates for campaign billboards and posters.
They argued that Sections 99(1) and 99(2) of the Electoral Act 2026, alongside Section 153 of the 1999 Constitution, provided the basis for their challenge concerning the regulation of electoral campaigns.
Their position was that the agency’s directive exceeded its lawful powers and interfered with the national framework governing political campaigns.
The defendants included ENSSAA, its General Manager, the Enugu State House of Assembly, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the Advertising Regulatory Council of Nigeria (ARCON) and the Nigeria Police Force.
The suit was registered as FHC/EN/CS/165/2026.
What the Court Decided
In dismissing the suit, Justice Segun-Bello held that outdoor advertising was not a matter reserved exclusively for the National Assembly or ARCON.
The court accepted the argument that outdoor advertising fell within the purview of local government functions that could be validly exercised by a state agency where the necessary legal authority had been delegated.
The judge also found that ENSSAA had established a valid basis for issuing its February 9, 2026 directive regulating political campaign advertisements.
Consequently, the court ruled that it was not beyond the powers of ENSSAA and its General Manager to impose the mandatory ₦150 million advertising permit fee for the use of billboards in Enugu State.
The decision therefore upheld the agency’s authority against the specific legal challenge brought by the plaintiffs.
However, the ruling should not be interpreted as automatically resolving every possible legal question concerning campaign advertising or the application of the fee in circumstances not addressed by the judgment.
Implications for the 2027 General Elections
The decision could have considerable implications for political parties seeking to establish a visible presence across Enugu State during the 2027 election campaign.
Billboards and posters remain important tools for political communication, allowing parties and candidates to promote their programmes, publicise campaign events and build recognition among voters.
A mandatory permit fee of ₦150 million could represent a substantial financial commitment, particularly for smaller parties with limited funding.
For parties operating with constrained resources, the cost of outdoor advertising could influence how they allocate campaign funds between billboards, rallies, media engagements, digital campaigns and other voter-outreach activities.
The judgment may therefore intensify discussions about the financial barriers facing opposition parties and the importance of ensuring that campaign regulations are administered transparently and consistently.
At the same time, the existence of a regulatory fee does not, by itself, establish that a political party has been unlawfully prevented from campaigning. The legal framework, the scope of the permit requirement and the way it is applied remain relevant considerations.
ENSSAA’s Regulatory Powers
The dispute also highlights the relationship between state-level outdoor advertising regulation and the national framework governing elections.
ENSSAA is responsible for regulating structures used for signage and outdoor advertising within the scope of its legal mandate in Enugu State.
The court’s decision was based on its conclusion that the agency possessed validly delegated authority to regulate outdoor advertisements, including political campaign displays covered by the directive.
This distinction is important because the regulation of election campaigns and the regulation of physical advertising structures may involve different legal responsibilities.
The judgment, as reported, accepted that outdoor advertising was not exclusively a federal responsibility and that the relevant authority could be exercised by a state agency under a valid delegation.
The practical effect of the decision will depend on how the agency implements the directive and how political parties respond to the financial and administrative requirements.
Balancing Regulation and Political Participation
The ruling raises broader questions about the relationship between advertising regulation, the cost of political participation and the need for a fair electoral environment.
State authorities have legitimate interests in regulating outdoor structures, maintaining public spaces and enforcing applicable advertising requirements. Political parties, however, also need reasonable opportunities to communicate their messages to voters.
Where campaign advertising charges are substantial, transparency in their calculation, application and enforcement becomes especially important.
Political parties may therefore continue to scrutinise the legal basis of advertising charges, the availability of alternative campaign channels and the practical effects of the requirements on smaller political organisations.
The court’s decision settles the specific challenge before it in favour of ENSSAA, but wider discussions about campaign costs and equal political opportunities are likely to remain relevant as the 2027 elections approach.
The Federal High Court’s decision to uphold ENSSAA’s authority to impose a ₦150 million political campaign billboard permit fee marks an important development in the regulation of outdoor advertising in Enugu State.
By dismissing the opposition parties’ challenge, the court affirmed the agency’s authority under the relevant state legal framework and rejected the argument that the regulation fell exclusively within federal jurisdiction.
The ruling could shape how political parties plan their campaign advertising in the state ahead of the 2027 general elections, especially those with limited financial resources.
As political preparations intensify, attention will remain on how ENSSAA implements the directive and how parties navigate the financial and regulatory requirements governing outdoor campaign advertising.
🎓 Attend 2027/2028 JAMB, Post-UTME, WAEC, and NECO GCE Tutorials
Get fully prepared with expert tutors, comprehensive study materials, and personalised academic guidance at Akahi Tutors.
📍 Located at 67, Oduduwa College Road, Off Sabo Junction, Ile-Ife.
📞 Call: 08038644328
for enrollment and accommodation reservation.