INEC Requests Appeal Court to Reverse Ruling That Nullified Election Guidelines

Alex Enumah in Abuja

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has requested the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal to overturn a Federal High Court judgment that nullified part of its guidelines for the 2027 general elections.

INEC has also filed a motion asking the appellate court to stay the execution of the trial court’s judgment while the appeal is considered.

Last week, Justice Muhammed Umar of the Federal High Court in Abuja nullified the commission’s revised timetable, which had required political parties to submit their membership registers and databases by May 10 as a condition for participation in the 2027 elections.

The order was issued during the hearing of a suit filed by the Youth Party, which challenged the legality of the directive.

According to the trial court, INEC could not lawfully shorten the timeline already provided under Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act 2026 for the submission of party membership records and candidates’ particulars.

Unhappy with the decision, the commission approached the appellate court on May 25 to reverse the trial court’s ruling.

Represented by Chief Alex Izinyon, SAN, the commission’s legal team presented nine grounds of appeal, arguing that the trial court erred in law by failing to address the jurisdictional issue of the suit being hypothetical and academic, which they say deprived the appellant of a fair hearing.

“It is clear from the wording of Sections 29(1), 82 and 84 of the Electoral Act, 2026, that political parties must submit the names of candidates who emerged from valid primaries and who the party intends to sponsor at the elections not later than 120 days before the general election,” Izinyon wrote. “What is required of parties under the Act is to notify INEC 21 days before holding primaries, congresses or conventions, or any meeting convened for the election of executive committees, other governing bodies or nominating candidates. The defendant is not mandated to impose a timeframe for parties to conduct their primaries, provided they are completed and submitted not later than the 120 days prescribed by the Act. See Section 82(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026.”

The senior lawyer also contended that the trial court’s judgment ran counter to the evidence presented and prayed for an order allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgment.

INEC is also asking the appellate court to strike out the suit on the ground that the respondent lacked locus standi to institute and maintain it.

Justice Umar’s judgment last week held that, “going by the provisions of Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026, which requires parties to submit personal particulars of their candidates not later than 120 days before an election, INEC cannot lawfully abridge or limit that statutory period by prescribing a shorter timeframe in its 2027 election timetable.”

Similarly, citing Section 31 of the Electoral Act, 2026, which allows parties to withdraw and substitute candidates not later than 90 days before an election, the court held that INEC lacks the power to impose an earlier deadline for withdrawal and replacement of candidates in its 2027 timetable.

Justice Umar also held that, under Section 32 of the Electoral Act, 2026, INEC does not possess the statutory power to publish the final list of candidates for the 2027 general election before the 60‑day minimum period prescribed by law.

“A declaration is made that, upon proper construction of Section 98 of the Electoral Act, 2026, the defendant does not possess the statutory authority to fix in its timetable for the 2027 general elections a campaign end date 2 days before the elections.”

“A declaration is made that, upon proper interpretation of Section 33 of the Electoral Act, 2026, the timeframe prescribed by the defendant for submission of membership registers for the conduct of primary elections is not applicable to primary elections conducted for the purpose of replacing withdrawn candidates.”

Justice Umar subsequently ordered that the time‑frames imposed by the defendant in its Revised Timetable and Schedule of Activities for the 2027 General Election be set aside or nullified. These include the conduct of primary elections by parties, submission of personal particulars of candidates, withdrawal and replacement of candidates, publication of the final list of candidates, and campaigning for the 2027 general elections, as they are inconsistent with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026.