Court backs electoral act, rejects NDC challenge ahead of 2027 polls

Stay Connected

Follow Very Nigerian

Get the latest Nigerian news, trending stories and breaking updates directly on WhatsApp.

Join Our Channel →

The Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a lawsuit filed by the National Democratic Congress (NDC) seeking to invalidate key provisions of the Electoral Act 2026.

In a judgment delivered on Tuesday, Justice Muhammed Umar ruled that the suit lacked merit and refused the party’s request to strike down Section 138 of the Electoral Act 2026.

The section removes the issue of a candidate’s qualification as a valid ground for filing an election petition.

The NDC had also challenged Section 77(5) of the Electoral Act 2026, which provides that only individuals whose names appear in the register submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) at least 21 days before the date fixed for party primaries, congresses or conventions are eligible to vote in those exercises.

However, Justice Umar held that the issue concerning the legality of Section 77(5) had already been settled by the Court of Appeal.

Consequently, the court declined to nullify Section 138 of the Electoral Act 2026, affirming that the NDC failed to establish sufficient grounds for the reliefs it sought.

According to Justice Umar, contrary to the position of the NDC, there is no conflict between section 138 of the electoral law and the provisions of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.

He held that both legislations are complementary as they relate to issues of qualification for elective offices.

The court held that while the 1999 Constitution, as amended, prescribes the qualifications and disqualifications for elective offices, the Electoral Act merely provides the procedure and timeline for ventilating disputes arising from party primaries.

Justice Umar held that the electoral law made provision for any aggrieved party who intends to challenge the qualification of any candidate nominated to INEC to do so at the pre-election stage.

“The provision of Section 138 of the Electoral Act 2026 complements the provision of the Constitution but is not in conflict with it. The contention of the plaintiff that Section 138 is inconsistent with the Constitution is of no merit,” the court held.

On the issue of Section 77(5) of the Electoral Act 2026, Justice Umar held that the appellate court’s judgment serves as a binding precedent and the extant position of the law on the matter.

Besides, the court upheld a preliminary objection the Clerk of the National Assembly filed, querying the competence of the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/635/2025.

The Clerk of the National Assembly had insisted that the NDC failed to comply with the statutory requirement of serving a pre-action notice before it instituted the legal action.

Justice Umar held that the non-service of a pre-action notice on the 2nd defendant rendered the suit incompetent and liable to be struck out.

He held that the suit was an invitation for the court to interpret provisions of both the Electoral Act 2026 and the 1999 Constitution, as amended, adding that the mere attachment of INEC’s election timetable to the originating summons did not transform the case into a pre-election matter.

“The fact that the defendant’s timetable is attached cannot make the case fall within the contemplation of Section 285,” the court added.

Specifically, the NDC had, in the suit, urged the court to, among others, declare that questions bordering on the qualification of candidates could be raised after elections.

Listed as defendants in the matter were the Attorney General of the Federation, the Clerk of the National Assembly, Senate President Godswill Akpabio, and INEC.

It will be recalled that the Court of Appeal in Abuja had, on July 16, struck down sections 77(5), (6), and (7), as well as 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026, which regulate membership registers of political parties and the procedure for the nomination of candidates for the 2027 general elections.

In a unanimous decision, a three-member panel of the appellate court held that the sections were inconsistent with the provisions of sections 221 and 222 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, which give political parties the right to decide whom to sponsor in an election.

The judgment followed an appeal marked CA/ABJ/CV/750/2026, which the Zenith Party (ZP) lodged against the INEC.

The panel was led by Justice Balkisu Bello Aliyu, while the lead judgment was delivered by Justice Eberechi Nyesom-Wike.

The ZP went to the appellate court after Justice Umar dismissed a case it filed challenging the constitutionality of the listed sections of the Electoral Act 2026.