The All Progressives Congress (APC) has asked the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to find out which parties failed to submit their membership registers on time.
It also wants INEC to apply the penalty in law, which can include barring a party from fielding candidates in the general election.
NewDailyPrime obtained the development from an APC request letter dated 9 October 2026 and sent to the INEC chairman in Abuja.
The letter was signed by the APC National Chairman, Prof. Nentawe Yilwatda, and the National Secretary, Sen. Surajudeen Basiru.
The party bases its request on a Supreme Court judgment delivered on 24 September 2026 in INEC v Zenith Labour Party (Suit No. SC/CV/495/2026).
What the APC wants INEC to do
The APC wants INEC to enforce the judgment in line with its terms and legal effect. It also wants the Commission to check whether each party submitted its digital membership register not later than 21 days before its primary election, congress or convention.
A digital membership register is a party’s list of members in electronic form. Section 77(4) of the Electoral Act 2026 says each party must give INEC a copy not later than 21 days before the date fixed for its primaries, congresses or conventions.
The party further wants INEC to apply the penalties for non-compliance under section 77(7) of the Act and the Supreme Court’s decision. These include excluding a party from fielding candidates where the legal conditions are met.
READ RELATED NEWS
INEC, anti-graft agencies partner to stop vote buying
Adeyanju urges INEC to comply with supreme court judgment on electoral act
2027 election results will not be predetermined — INEC chairman
Lastly, the APC wants INEC to make sure only candidates whose names are in the register submitted to the Commission are recognised as eligible to vote and be voted for. It says no other register should be used.
The APC says compliance with section 77 is “not a matter of discretion but a statutory obligation”.
It says the Supreme Court has settled how the law should be read.
The party also says that letting parties ignore the rules, without the penalties the law sets, would “undermine the objectives of internal party democracy, electoral transparency and the rule of law”.
It asks INEC to act “expeditiously and decisively”, in line with the Electoral Act 2026, the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and the judgment.
What the Supreme Court decided
The Supreme Court upheld section 77 of the Electoral Act 2026 as the National Assembly passed it, the letter says. It did so by setting aside an order of the Court of Appeal.
That order had declared sections 77(5) to (7) and 84(2) of the Act unconstitutional. It had also nullified Activity Serial Number Two of INEC’s Revised Timetable and Schedule of Activities for the 2027 General Election.
The APC says section 77(5) allows only members whose names are in the register to vote and be voted for in party primaries, congresses and conventions. Section 77(6) bars a party from using any other register for those purposes.
The letter says the court explained the effect of section 77(7) at page 24 of its judgment. A party that fails to submit its digital membership register within the set period may be barred from fielding candidates in the general election. The APC says this shows the rules are mandatory and that breaking them has legal costs.
At pages 25 and 26, the court said section 77 exists to make parties follow internal democracy, the letter says. It said this means primaries, congresses and conventions must be fair, open and open to checks.
The court also said that submitting registers on time, the eligibility of members to vote and be voted for, and the sole use of the register given to INEC are all part of that aim.
The APC says the court relied on section 228(a) of the 1999 Constitution. That section lets the National Assembly make laws on guidelines and rules to ensure internal democracy in political parties. These include laws on how primaries, congresses and conventions are run.
The letter also says the court relied on an earlier case, Ardo v Nyako (2014) 10 NWLR (Pt. 1416) 591 at 620. In that case, the court held:
“The power to nominate candidates for election still resides with the political parties, but the procedure for the nomination is not left to the whims and caprices of party officials.”
The APC says the court found at page 34 that INEC gave parties enough time under section 77(4) to submit their registers. In the party’s words, “there is no justifiable reason for any political party to breach the deadline imposed by law”.
INEC was the appellant in the case. The APC says this means the Commission is “directly bound by and affected by the judgment of the Supreme Court”.
The letter cites section 287(1) of the Constitution, which it quotes as saying: “The decisions of the Supreme Court shall be enforced in any part of the Federation by all authorities and persons, and by courts with subordinate jurisdiction to that of the Supreme Court.”
The APC says this section places a constitutional duty on INEC to give effect to the judgment as it carries out its statutory work. The letter says a copy of the judgment is attached for ease of reference.
For More News Details, Visit www.NewDailyPrime.news.
