morganaBLE politics/elections
Legal observers say the ambiguity surrounding the applicability of the restored provisions to past primaries has created fertile ground for disputes, particularly in cases involving defections, substitution of candidates and contested nomination processes.
KaNo —
Fresh legal disputes are emerging across Nigeria’s political landscape following the Supreme Court’s decision to restore key provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 governing party membership registers and candidate nominations, a development that has introduced fresh uncertainty into preparations for the 2027 general elections.
The apex court, in a unanimous judgment delivered on Thursday in appeal No. SC/CR/495/2026, reinstated Sections 77(5), 77(6), 77(7) and 84(2) of the Electoral Act.
The seven-member panel, led by Justice Adamu Jauro, overturned an earlier ruling of the Court of Appeal which had, on July 16, declared the provisions unconstitutional.
The restored sections mandate political parties to maintain and submit valid membership registers to the Independent National Electoral Commission within a stipulated period and to rely on such registers for the conduct of their primaries.
Section 84(2) further provides for the adoption of direct primaries or consensus arrangements in the nomination of candidates.
Although the Supreme Court did not invalidate nominations already concluded under the previous legal interpretation, the judgment has generated widespread debate among political actors, lawyers and electoral stakeholders over its implications for candidates who emerged through processes that may not fully align with the reinstated provisions.
The ruling has also placed INEC in a delicate position, as the commission must now determine how to implement the judgment without disrupting ongoing electoral preparations or triggering a wave of litigations capable of derailing party primaries nationwide.
Legal observers say the ambiguity surrounding the applicability of the restored provisions to past primaries has created fertile ground for disputes, particularly in cases involving defections, substitution of candidates and contested nomination processes.
Among those whose candidacies could face scrutiny are former Inspector-General of Police, Mohammed Adamu, who secured the Social Democratic Party governorship ticket in Nasarawa State through a substitution primary; former House of Representatives Minority Leader, Kingsley Chinda, who emerged as the All Progressives Congress governorship candidate in Rivers State; and Senator Saliu Mustapha, who defected from the APC to the Peoples Democratic Party before clinching the PDP senatorial ticket for Kwara Central.
In Gombe State, the situation has already taken a concrete legal turn.
The Federal High Court, sitting in the state, on September 24, nullified the Peoples Democratic Party governorship primary held on May 26, 2026, which produced former Minister of Communications and Digital Economy, Isa Pantami, as the party’s candidate.
The court ordered the PDP to conduct a fresh primary within 30 days, prompting the party to fix September 29 for a new exercise.
Pantami had emerged from the earlier primary through a voice affirmation process shortly after defecting from the APC to the PDP, a development that was challenged by another aspirant, Usman Garry.
Confirming the fresh exercise, the PDP Public Relations Officer in Gombe State, Abdulkadir Dukku, directed all eligible delegates to assemble at their respective wards to participate in the process.
“All eligible delegates are hereby directed to assemble at their respective ward areas to participate in the exercise and vote for the aspirant of their choice,” Dukku said, urging party members and supporters to cooperate and maintain order during the exercise.
He also called for peaceful conduct, stressing the need for participants to adhere strictly to the party’s guidelines to ensure a credible and transparent process.
Meanwhile, political tensions have also surfaced in Osun State, where the Senator representing Osun East, Olubiyi Fadeyi, dismissed claims that the Supreme Court judgment had jeopardised his re-election bid.
In a statement issued in Osogbo on Saturday, Fadeyi described reports suggesting his disqualification as speculative and politically motivated, insisting that his emergence as the PDP candidate for the Osun Central Senatorial District complied fully with both the Electoral Act and the party’s constitution.
“For clarity’s sake, there is no clear evidence of Fadeyi’s disqualification from any court sitting; hence, the report of his alleged disqualification remains speculative and unfounded,” the statement read.
He added that the nomination process was duly endorsed by all relevant party organs and remained an internal matter of the PDP.
“The process to bestow the PDP ticket on Senator Fadeyi for a second term in office is clear, legal and approved by all relevant party executives.
Everything was done in accordance with the law and the party’s laid-down rules,” he stated.
Despite these assurances, legal experts warn that the Supreme Court ruling could open the floodgates for litigation, particularly from aggrieved aspirants seeking to challenge the validity of primaries conducted under disputed procedures.
A Senior Advocate of Nigeria and former Attorney-General of Kwara State, Salman Jawondo, however, downplayed fears that the judgment would automatically invalidate existing nominations.
Speaking in an interview, Jawondo explained that the ruling amounted to a general interpretation of the law and could not be applied retrospectively to nullify completed processes.
“It does not affect any nomination at all. INEC needs a fresh court pronouncement to delist them. Some people must complain before INEC can act,” he said.
He further noted that any challenge to a candidate’s nomination must be initiated by a person with the requisite legal standing, typically an aspirant who participated in the primary, and must be filed within the legally prescribed timeframe.
“As at the time the nomination was made, there was no such effect. It does not take effect on any previously done process. The judgment is generic and it is just an interpretation of the law,” Jawondo added.
He stressed that the courts would ultimately determine the fate of disputed candidacies on a case-by-case basis, depending on the specific facts and evidence presented.
With political parties intensifying preparations for the 2027 elections, the interplay between the Supreme Court judgment and ongoing primary processes is expected to shape the electoral landscape in the coming months.
Analysts say the situation underscores the persistent challenges associated with Nigeria’s electoral legal framework, particularly the tension between evolving judicial interpretations and the practical realities of political party operations.
As parties move to align their processes with the restored provisions, stakeholders have called for clearer guidelines from INEC to prevent confusion and ensure compliance.
