Court of Appeal Upholds INEC’s 2027 Election Guidelines, Overturns High Court Ruling
The Court of Appeal on Thursday set aside the judgement of the Federal High Court that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has no constitutional or statutory authority to set the...
The Court of Appeal on Thursday set aside the judgement of the Federal High Court that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has no constitutional or statutory authority to set the timetable for party primaries ahead of the 2027 general elections.
The appellate court, in a unanimous judgement read by Justice Okon Abang but prepared by Justice Adebukola Banjoko, held that the ruling of the Federal High Court in Abuja, which nullified the guidelines set by the electoral commission and also barred their implementation, held that the Youth Party (YP), which instituted the case against INEC, lacked legal power (locus standi) to do what it did.
The court of appeal also held that the YP failed to explain how the guidelines affected it and its members in conducting its primary elections for the nomination of candidates for the 2027 polls, nor did the political party establish how the guidelines affected the submission of its nominated candidates to INEC.
As a result, the three justices unanimously agreed that Justice Mohammed Umar of the Federal High Court, Abuja, who on May 20 nullified the guidelines on the ground that they violated certain provisions of the Electoral Act, did so in gross error, thereby leading to a miscarriage of justice.
On May 20, 2026, in a case with Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/517/2026 between the Youth Party and INEC, in which the political party sued the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the court ruled in its favour, holding that INEC cannot alter or shorten the timelines set by the Electoral Act, 2026. Justice M.G. Umar held that under Sections 29, 82 and 84(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026, INEC’s role is limited to receiving notices of party primaries, monitoring them, and collecting candidates’ personal particulars.
The high court held that INEC cannot require political parties to hold their candidate-nomination primaries within timelines set by the commission. The judgement further emphasised that political parties are required by law to submit the names and particulars of their candidates to INEC no later than 120 days before the date fixed for the election.
The Court ruled that INEC may observe, monitor, and receive notices of party primaries, but it has no legal authority to set the timetable for when parties must hold them.
Under the law, parties have up to 120 days before an election to submit their candidates’ personal details. INEC cannot legally shorten this period in its timetable.
The court held that political parties may withdraw and replace candidates up to 90 days before an election and that INEC cannot impose an earlier deadline.
On membership registers, the court ruled that the specific deadlines set by INEC for submitting political party membership registers do not apply to primary elections held purely to replace a candidate who has withdrawn.
Final Candidate List: INEC cannot publish the final list of candidates earlier than the 60-day minimum period before the election prescribed by law.
On INEC’s timetable for the end of campaigns, the court ruled that INEC does not have the legal backing to force political campaigns to end exactly 2 days before the elections through its timetable.
In its words, the Judge stated that “It is clear from the wording of Sections 29(1), 82 and 84 of the Electoral Act, 2026, the following can be understood. Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026, mandates Political Parties to submit the names of candidates in the prescribed forms of the candidates who emerged from their valid primaries which such a political party intends to sponsor at the elections, not later than 120 days before the date of the General Election.
“What is required of Political Parties to do under the Electoral Act, 2026 is to notify the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) 21 days before the holding of its primaries, congresses or conventions, or any conference or meeting convened for the election of its executive committees or other governing bodies for nominating candidates.
“The Defendant is not mandated to impose a timeframe for political parties to conduct their primaries provided that it will be done and submitted not later than the 120 days provided by the Electoral Act, 2026. See Section 82(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026,” the court said.
Not satisfied with the high court’s decision, INEC approached the appellate court to seek redress in the matter, arguing that the lower court erred in law when it failed to pronounce on the jurisdictional issue of the suit being hypothetical and academic, as well as a denial of fair hearing to the appellant.
INEC, through its lead counsel, Dr Alex Izinyon, had asked the Court of Appeal to set aside the judgement of the Federal High Court which nullified part of the election guidelines put in place by the agency for the conduct of the 2027 general election.
The electoral commission also insisted that the verdict of the high court was against the weight of evidence that was placed before it by the parties, praying the appellate court for an order allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgement.
The electoral body further urged the Court of Appeal to strike out YP’s case on the ground that it lacked the locus standi (legal right) to institute and maintain the action it said was merely academic.
As a result, the court of appeal ruled that INEC acted within its legal powers to issue the election timetable and that the lower court “wrongly granted” the reliefs sought by the applicant. The court held that YP can only invoke the powers of the court if there are threats to its rights to participate in the 2027 elections.
No Comment! Be the first one.