- INEC gets CTC, weighs implementation this week
- Apex court says candidates not automatically disqualified
The Supreme Court has restored key provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 on party membership registers and candidate nominations, creating fresh grounds for challenges to the 2027 tickets of the APC, PDP, NDC and other parties.
The ruling does not automatically disqualify any candidate. The court distinguished between an individual’s qualification to contest and whether the candidate’s party met the legal requirements for nominations. A ticket may therefore be challenged where a party or candidate is shown to have breached the law.
INEC has received the certified true copy of the judgment and is reviewing its implications. The commission is expected to decide this week how to implement the ruling.
A seven-member Supreme Court panel, presided over by Justice Adamu Jauro, restored Sections 77(5), 77(6), 77(7) and 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026 on September 24. The Court of Appeal had earlier declared the provisions unconstitutional and void. Justice Emmanuel Agim delivered the lead judgment.
Under Sections 77(5) and 77(6), only members listed on a party’s register submitted to INEC may vote or be voted for at its primaries, congresses and conventions, and parties may not use another register. Section 77(7) bars a party that fails to submit its register within the stipulated period from fielding candidates, while Section 84(2) limits nominations to direct primaries or consensus.
The court made no finding against any candidate. The controversy now centres on whether parties complied with the statutory requirements, particularly in cases involving politicians who changed parties around the primaries.
In Rivers, APC governorship candidate Kingsley Chinda emerged on May 21 after serving as minority leader of the House of Representatives on the PDP platform. His resignation from the leadership took effect on April 23, but his formal defection to the APC was announced on June 2. The timing has prompted questions about when he became an APC member and whether his name appeared on the register used for the primary. The Rivers APC maintains that he complied with the law.
In Delta, former Deputy Senate President Ovie Omo-Agege and former state Assembly Speaker Victor Ochei left the APC for the NDC after receiving waivers. Omo-Agege, who lost the APC Delta Central senatorial primary to Senator Ede Dafinone, resigned on May 22 and later won the NDC ticket. Ochei similarly emerged as the NDC’s Delta North candidate. The NDC says both nominations remain valid.
In Gombe, former minister Isa Pantami withdrew from the APC governorship primary in May, joined the PDP and initially emerged through voice affirmation. A Federal High Court later nullified the primary for procedural and legal non-compliance but declined to disqualify Pantami over his previous APC membership. He won the PDP’s fresh direct primary on September 29.
Questions have also been raised over PDP senatorial candidates Saliu Mustapha and Kolo Baba Jiya in Kwara, while former senator Iyabo Obasanjo’s Ogun Central candidacy has drawn similar scrutiny. Their parties and camps reject claims that the Supreme Court ruling automatically invalidated the nominations.
A separate membership-register dispute involving PRP presidential candidate Donald Duke was dismissed by the Federal High Court in Abuja on September 30. The court held that aspirant Yakubu Kingsley’s challenge was statute-barred and unproven. No prominent ADC candidate has been formally identified as affected, and party officials say their nominations complied with the law.
Human rights lawyer Deji Adeyanju has urged INEC to remove affected candidates from its portal, but the commission says it will study the certified judgment before taking a position.
INEC’s interpretation could reshape the 2027 political calculations. The immediate disputes are likely to focus on the contents of party registers, when candidates became members, how nominations were conducted and whether individual challengers can prove non-compliance in court.
