Court Orders INEC To Align Timetable With Electoral Act

0

…Rules Jonathan Eligible To Contest Presidential Poll
…PDP Hails Judgment Clearing Former President

The Federal High Court in Abuja, on Tuesday, ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to amend the timetable it issued for the conduct of the 2027 general elec­tions.

The court, in a judgment de­livered by Justice James Omoto­sho, directed that the timetable and schedule of activities for the elections be amended to comply with Sections 29(1) and 31 of the Electoral Act 2026.

According to the court, although the commission is empowered by the 1999 con­stitution, as amended, and the Electoral Act 2026, to issue a timetable for elections and to alter the same as it deems fit, such actions must be carried out in strict compliance with the provisions of the law.

It further held that INEC can­not lawfully abridge or vary the 90-day period for substitution of candidates under Section 31 of the Electoral Act 2026.

“This honourable court hereby declares that the defen­dant (INEC) cannot abridge the time stipulated in Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act 2026, given to political parties to submit the names of their candidates at least 120 days to the date of election,” Justice Omotosho held.

However, the court stressed that INEC did not act ultra vires its powers when it requested the membership register of politi­cal parties and also gave a time­frame within which primary elections should be conducted.

It nonetheless declared that the deadlines of August 29, 2026 and September 16, 2026, fixed for political parties to submit nom­ination forms for candidates for Presidential and National Assembly elections as well as Governorship and House of Assembly elections, were void to the extent of their inconsis­tency with the clear provisions of Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act 2026.

The judgment followed a suit marked FHC/ABJ/ CS/720/2026, filed by the Social Democratic Party (SDP).

INEC was listed as the sole defendant in the matter.

The party, in the suit it filed on April 9 through its team of lawyers led by Mr. Realwan Okpanachi, prayed the court to, among other things, deter­mine:

“Whether, having regard to Sections 82 and 84(1) of the Electoral Act 2026, the defen­dant’s powers to receive notic­es, attend, observe, and monitor party primaries extend to fixing or prescribing the timetable within which political parties must conduct their primaries.”

As well as, “whether, having regard to Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act 2026, the defen­dant can lawfully abridge the statutory period of 120 days before an election for the sub­mission of candidates’ partic­ulars by imposing timelines in its Revised Timetable for 2027 general elections.”

INEC’s legal team, led by Dr. Alex Izinyon, SAN, urged the court to dismiss the suit for want of merit, insisting it acted within its statutory powers.

It further prayed the court to dismiss the suit for being stat­ute-barred.

While the court held that the electoral body is empowered to issue a timetable for elections in strict compliance with the timeframes provided by the law, it held that the suit was not statute-barred.

The court noted that the suit originated from a press state­ment INEC issued on March 27.

It held that an election timetable is a chain of events or actions which includes the submission of membership registers of political parties to be used for the purpose of pri­maries, and the fixing of time­frames within which political parties are to organise their pri­mary elections for the purpose of the 2027 polls.

The court held that the claims of the plaintiff succeed­ed in part.

The judgment came barely 24 hours after INEC approached the Court of Appeal in Abuja to set aside an earlier verdict of the court that voided the timelines it issued for the 2027 general elec­tions.

The commission also ap­plied for a stay of execution of the judgment, pending the de­termination of its appeal.

In the notice of appeal dat­ed May 25, INEC raised nine grounds it urged the appellate court to consider in vacating the judgment the High Court delivered on May 20, in respect of a similar suit filed against it by the Youth Party (YP).

Court Rules Jonathan Eligible To Con­test 2027 Election

Meanwhile, a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja, on Tues­day, ruled that former President Goodluck Jonathan is eligible to contest in the 2027 general election.

Justice Peter Lifu made the declaration while delivering judgment in a suit seeking to bar Jonathan from participat­ing in future presidential elec­tion, haven taken the oath of office twice as president.

Recall that the Kabiru Tan­imu Turaki-led Peoples Demo­cratic Party (PDP), last week, offered a waiver to Jonathan as the only presidential candidate of the party.

But one Johnmary Jideobi had instituted a suit seeking an order restraining Jonathan from presenting himself to any political party as a candidate for the 2027 presidential election.

The plaintiff had earlier asked the court to stop the In­dependent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from ac­cepting, processing or publish­ing Jonathan’s name as a pres­idential candidate.

He asked the court to deter­mine whether, having regard to Sections 1(1), (2), (3) and 137(3) of the 1999 constitution, Jonathan remains eligible to seek the of­fice of president again.

But in his ruling on Tuesday, Justice Peter Lifu held that Jon­athan could participate in the election as a contestant.

According to Lifu, the suit was a waste of the court’s pre­cious time because both the Fed­eral High Court and the Court of Appeal have already resolved the eligibility of Jonathan.

“I am bound by the above de­cision of the Court of Appeal and this court, I have no more to add”, Lifu said.

He also awarded a N20 mil­lion fine against Jideobi and in favour of the ex-president.

He equally awarded a one million fine against the plain­tiff and in favour of the Attor­ney-General of the Federation (AGF).

Justice Lifu held that Jideo­bi lacked the legal right to have instituted the suit having not suffered any loss from his per­ceived Jonathan’s intention to vie for the next year’s poll.

The judge, who said that a Federal High Court in Yena­goa and an Appeal Court had already held that Jonathan was eligible to run, said he was bound by the decision of the appellate court.

The judge then described the lawyer’s suit as “an abuse of court process.”

Justice Lifu also dismissed Jideobi’s motion seeking the judge’s withdrawal from the case for being frivolous.

PDP Hails Judgment Clearing Jona­than To Run For 2027 Election

Meanwhile, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has hailed the judgment of the Fed­eral High Court, sitting in Abu­ja which held that President Goodluck Jonathan is eligible to contest for the 2027 presiden­tial election, despite having pre­viously been sworn to the oath of office of the president twice.

According to a statement on Tuesday signed by its National Publicity Secretary,

Interim National Working Committee, Comrade Ini Eme­mobong, the party noted that the judgment is clearly in align­ment with the law and common sense, as laws cannot have a ret­roactive or retrospective effect.

The statement reads, “The suit, which, for all intents and purposes, was vexatious and a gross abuse of court processes, was a very unnecessary distrac­tion that ought not to have been instituted in the first instance. The punitive cost against the plaintiff is also very much wel­comed, to serve as a deterrent to intending busybodies and ir­ritants, who make themselves available for use by those seek­ing to derail democracy.

“This development, coupled with the screening waiver that our party had granted Presi­dent Goodluck Jonathan, has made the pathway for his pres­idential rescue mission totally unfettered, especially as the pri­maries of the party to select all its candidates will hold on May 28, 2026.”