0
The national leadership of the Youth Party has distanced itself from a suit filed against the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) at the Federal High Court in Abuja, saying the action was instituted without the approval of the party’s recognised organs.
In a disclaimer and public notice issued on Wednesday, the party said the suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/517/2026 and titled Youth Party vs. INEC, as well as the judgment reportedly delivered on May 20, 2026, by Justice M. G. Umar, were initiated without the authorisation of the party’s National Working Committee (NWC).
The party stated that neither its leadership nor any officially recognised structure approved the legal action against INEC, alleging that those behind the suit acted without its mandate.
According to the statement, the Youth Party remains committed to complying with the electoral guidelines and timetable issued by INEC ahead of the 2027 general elections.
It added that the party is not in conflict with the electoral body and has no intention of using the courts to undermine or circumvent lawful electoral processes.
“We dissociate ourselves entirely from this suit, its proceedings, and the judgment arising therefrom,” the statement read.
The party further stated: “Furthermore, we wish to state clearly that the Youth Party has consistently demonstrated its readiness and capacity to comply with the electoral guidelines and timetable issued by INEC for the 2027 General Elections. Whilst the timeframe is short and challenging, we do not seek judicial intervention. We are focused on our National Convention fixed for Saturday, May 23, and our primaries scheduled for Friday, May 29, 2026.”
The leadership also stated that any individual or group found to have filed or prosecuted the matter in the party’s name without authorisation could be held personally accountable.
The disclaimer comes amid heightened political activities and legal disputes linked to preparations for the 2027 general elections.
Although the party did not provide full details of the judgment in its statement, the development indicates that the party leadership disputes the institution of the suit filed in its name.
The party reaffirmed its commitment to lawful engagement with INEC and adherence to Nigeria’s electoral framework.
According to details of the judgment circulating in relation to the case, Justice M. G. Umar of the Federal High Court in Abuja reportedly restrained INEC from enforcing portions of its revised timetable and schedule of activities for the 2027 general elections.
The court was said to have held that some timelines imposed by the electoral body were inconsistent with provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026.
According to the reported judgment, the court held that INEC exceeded its statutory powers by prescribing deadlines that allegedly abridged periods guaranteed to political parties under the Electoral Act.
The suit was reportedly argued by J. O. Olotu for the plaintiff, while Sarafa Yusuf appeared for INEC.
In the reported ruling, the court clarified the scope of INEC’s powers regarding party primaries, submission of candidates’ particulars, substitution of candidates, publication of final candidate lists, and campaign activities.
Justice Umar was said to have held that Sections 29, 82, and 84(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026 do not empower INEC to prescribe timelines for political parties to conduct primaries for the nomination of candidates for the 2027 elections.
According to the reported decision, the court held that INEC’s role is limited to receiving notices of party primaries, monitoring the primaries, and obtaining candidates’ particulars, but does not extend to fixing dates for the conduct of primaries.
The court also reportedly declared that under Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act, political parties are entitled to submit candidates’ particulars up to 120 days before an election and that INEC cannot lawfully shorten that statutory period through its timetable.
Justice Umar was further said to have ruled that Section 31 of the Electoral Act allows political parties to withdraw and substitute candidates up to 90 days before an election, adding that INEC lacks the authority to impose an earlier deadline.
On the publication of candidates’ names, the court reportedly held that Section 32 of the Electoral Act does not permit INEC to publish the final list of candidates earlier than the minimum 60-day period prescribed by law.
The judge was also reported to have ruled that INEC does not have the statutory authority under Section 98 of the Electoral Act to compel political parties to end campaigns two days before an election, as stated in the revised timetable.
The court further reportedly clarified that the timeframe stipulated by INEC for the submission of membership registers for party primaries does not apply to primaries conducted to replace candidates who voluntarily withdraw from elections.
Consequently, the court was said to have nullified portions of INEC’s Revised Timetable and Schedule of Activities for the 2027 General Elections relating to party primaries, submission of candidates’ particulars, withdrawal and substitution of candidates, publication of final candidate lists, and campaign activities.
According to the reported judgment, the affected provisions of the timetable were declared inconsistent with the Electoral Act, 2026, and therefore unlawful, invalid, and of no effect.
The order was reportedly issued in Abuja under the seal of the court and signed by the Registrar, Mu’azu Kasimu.
