-
Court of Appeal overturns the Federal High Court judgment that nullified INEC’s guidelines and revised timetable for the 2027 general elections, clearing the way for the Commission to implement its election schedule.
-
Appellate court rules that the Youth Party lacked the legal standing to challenge the electoral body’s guidelines, holding that it failed to show how the timetable affected its primary elections or nomination of candidates.
-
Court declares that INEC’s Revised Timetable is subsidiary legislation with the same force of law as the Electoral Act 2026, affirming that the Commission acted within its statutory powers in fixing deadlines for political parties.
-
Judgment reverses all orders that invalidated timelines for party primaries, candidate nominations, substitutions, and submission of party membership registers, restoring certainty to preparations for Nigeria’s 2027 general elections.
July 16, (THEWILL) — The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja has set aside the judgment of the Federal High Court that nullified the Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) guidelines and revised timetable for the conduct of the 2027 general elections, affirming the electoral body’s authority to implement its schedule of activities for the polls.
In a unanimous judgment delivered on Thursday by a three-member panel, the appellate court voided the May 20 decision of the Federal High Court, Abuja, which had invalidated portions of INEC’s guidelines and restrained the Commission from implementing key timelines for the 2027 elections.
The lead judgment, prepared by Justice Adebukola Banjoko and read by Justice Okon Abang, held that the Youth Party (YP), which instituted the suit against INEC, lacked the requisite locus standi, or legal standing, to challenge the Commission’s guidelines.
Justice Banjoko held that the party failed to demonstrate how the guidelines adversely affected either its members or its conduct of primary elections for the nomination of candidates for the 2027 general elections.
The appellate court also found that the Youth Party failed to establish how the guidelines affected its statutory right to submit the names and particulars of its nominated candidates to INEC.
Court Faults Trial Judge
The three-member panel unanimously agreed that Justice Mohammed Umar of the Federal High Court erred in law when he nullified the guidelines on the ground that they were inconsistent with provisions of the Electoral Act 2026.
According to the appellate court, the trial judge failed to follow binding judicial precedents, resulting in a miscarriage of justice.
The court further held that INEC’s Revised Timetable and Schedule of Activities constitute subsidiary legislation made pursuant to the Electoral Act 2026 and therefore possess the same force of law as the principal legislation.
It ruled that the electoral commission acted within its statutory powers in issuing the guidelines and timetable, stressing that every deadline contained therein falls within the provisions of the Electoral Act.
Background to the Dispute
The legal dispute arose after the Youth Party instituted an action seeking a declaration that INEC lacked the statutory authority to prescribe timelines within which political parties must conduct their primary elections for the nomination of candidates ahead of the 2027 general elections.
In his May 20 judgment, Justice Mohammed Umar agreed with the party and invalidated INEC’s timelines for the conduct of party primaries and nomination of candidates.
The trial court also set aside INEC’s May 10 deadline requiring political parties to submit their membership registers and databases as a condition for participating in the 2027 general elections.
Justice Umar held that the timelines fixed by INEC for conducting primaries, submitting candidates’ particulars, withdrawing and replacing candidates were inconsistent with the provisions of the Electoral Act 2026.
The court further ruled that INEC could not lawfully abridge statutory timelines provided under the Electoral Act, including the 120 days for submission of candidates, the 90 days for withdrawal and substitution of candidates, and the minimum 60-day period for publication of the final list of candidates.
INEC had filed a notice of appeal dated May 25, 2026, challenging the Federal High Court judgment on nine grounds.
Represented by its lead counsel, Alex Izinyon, SAN, the Commission argued that the lower court failed to determine a jurisdictional objection it raised that the suit filed by the Youth Party was hypothetical and academic.
The electoral body maintained that the trial court’s failure to pronounce on the jurisdictional issue amounted to a denial of its constitutional right to a fair hearing.
INEC also contended that the Federal High Court wrongly interpreted Sections 29, 82, and 84 of the Electoral Act 2026 by holding that the Commission lacked the authority to prescribe timelines for political parties to conduct primaries and complete other pre-election activities.
The Commission urged the appellate court to allow the appeal, set aside the judgment, and uphold the validity of its election guidelines and revised timetable.
Felix Ifijeh is a journalist with years of professional reporting experience. Known for his keen news sense, compelling storytelling and commitment to accurate, impactful reporting, he has built a reputation for turning leads into clear, engaging, and well-structured reports that resonate with readers. His work reflects deep newsroom experience and a commitment to accurate, impactful journalism.
