The Supreme Court of Nigeria has restored key provisions of the Electoral Act 2026, sparking concerns over the nominations of several prominent candidates ahead of the 2027 general elections. In a judgment delivered on 24 September 2026, the apex court reinstated Sections 77(5), 77(6), 77(7), and 84(2) of the Act, which were earlier declared unconstitutional by the Court of Appeal. These provisions regulate party membership registers and the process of nominating candidates.
The restored provisions state that only members whose names appear in a party's membership register submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) at least 21 days before a primary, congress, or convention can participate in the exercise. Additionally, parties are required to use the register submitted to INEC for their internal elections. Section 84(2) provides for direct primaries or consensus in the nomination of candidates. This ruling has drawn attention to politicians who switched parties around the time of primaries.
One of the affected politicians is Kingsley Chinda, the APC governorship candidate in Rivers State, who emerged on 21 May after leaving the PDP for the APC. Questions have arisen about when his APC membership took effect and whether his name was on the register submitted to INEC before the primary. Similarly, Ovie Omo-Agege and Victor Ochei, NDC senatorial candidates in Delta Central and Delta North, respectively, moved from the APC to the NDC after the APC nomination exercises and were granted waivers by the NDC.
Other politicians whose nominations have raised concerns include Isa Pantami, the PDP governorship candidate in Gombe State, who moved from the APC to the PDP before emerging as a candidate. His initial nomination was challenged in court, leading to an order for a fresh primary, which he won. Donald Duke, the PRP presidential candidate, joined the PRP shortly before its presidential primary, and a rival challenged his nomination, alleging he was not on the register submitted to INEC.
The Supreme Court's judgment did not specifically name or disqualify any candidate. However, the legality of each nomination may depend on whether the parties concerned complied with the restored provisions during their nomination processes. INEC has received complaints from political parties, aggrieved aspirants, and members of the National Assembly over the implications of the judgment.
INEC Chairman, Professor Joash Amupitan, stated that the commission had received the certified true copy of the judgment and was reviewing it before deciding on the appropriate action. The review is expected to clarify whether the restored provisions affect the candidates whose nominations are under scrutiny as parties prepare for the 2027 elections. The commission's decision will likely have significant implications for the affected candidates and the electoral process as a whole.
The Supreme Court's judgment has significant implications for Nigerian politics, particularly in the run-up to the 2027 general elections. The restored provisions of the Electoral Act aim to ensure transparency and credibility in the nomination process. As the review of the judgment by INEC continues, stakeholders are eagerly awaiting the commission's decision on the matter. The outcome will likely have far-reaching consequences for the affected candidates and the broader electoral landscape.
Key points
- The Supreme Court's restoration of key provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 has raised questions over the nominations of several high-profile candidates.
- The affected politicians include Kingsley Chinda, Ovie Omo-Agege, Victor Ochei, Isa Pantami, and Donald Duke, among others.
- INEC is reviewing the judgment and is expected to clarify whether the restored provisions affect the candidates whose nominations are under scrutiny.
