Appeal Court says INEC can’t dictate to parties how to conduct primaries

The Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, has 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 delivered on Thursday, a three-member panel of the appellate court held that the Sections were inconsistent with provisions of Sections 221 and 222 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended, which gave 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 Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

The ZP had challenged the dismissal of a suit it filed to query the constitutionality of some provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 relating to membership registers of political parties and the conduct of primary elections.

Section 77(5) of the Electoral Act stipulates that only persons whose names are contained in the register submitted to INEC not later than 21 days before the date fixed for primaries, congresses or conventions, would be eligible to vote.

Sub-section (6) provides that a political party shall not use any other register for party primaries, congresses and conventions except the register submitted to the Commission.

ALSO READ: Court reserves judgment in Olawepo-Hashim’s suit against Accord, INEC

Likewise, sub-section (7) provides that a political party that fails to submit the membership register within the stipulated time shall not be eligible to field a candidate for the election.

On the other hand, Section 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026 provides that the procedure for the nomination of candidates by political parties for the various elective positions shall be by direct primaries or consensus.

Justice Mohammed Umar of the Federal High Court in Abuja had, on May 5, dismissed ZP’s suit as lacking in merit.

Dissatisfied with the judgment, the party approached the appellate court, praying it to, among others, determine whether the stated provisions of the Electoral Act are superior to the powers donated to political parties by the 1999 Constitution, as amended.

The party urged the appellate court to determine if the electoral law was not an attempt to usurp the right of political parties to decide how to conduct their internal affairs.

In its judgment, the appellate court noted that Sections 177 and 182 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, already listed the qualifying and disqualifying factors for political parties and candidates in an election.

It held that no other condition contained in a subsidiary law could disqualify an individual already qualified by the Constitution.