The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has commenced a detailed review of the Supreme Court judgment that restored key provisions of the Electoral Act 2026, with the decision expected to have implications for political parties and candidates ahead of the 2027 general elections.
The development follows the September 24 judgment of the Supreme Court in the legal dispute involving INEC and the Zenith Labour Party (ZLP).
A seven-member panel of the apex court, led by Justice Adamu Jauro, unanimously allowed INEC’s appeal and overturned an earlier Court of Appeal decision that had voided Sections 77(5), 77(6), 77(7) and 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026.
What the Supreme Court decided
The restored provisions deal largely with political party membership registers and the nomination of candidates.
Under Section 77(5), only members whose names appear on a party’s membership register submitted to INEC at least 21 days before a primary, congress or convention can participate in that exercise.
Section 77(6) requires political parties to use the submitted register for their internal electoral processes, while Section 77(7) provides consequences for parties that fail to submit the required register.
The Supreme Court also restored Section 84(2), which provides for the nomination of candidates through direct primaries or consensus.
The apex court held that the provisions were not inconsistent with the 1999 Constitution and consequently restored the earlier judgment of the Federal High Court.
INEC receives certified judgment
For INEC, the immediate task is now to determine the practical implications of the judgment.
INEC Chairman, Professor Joash Amupitan, disclosed on Tuesday that the commission had received the certified true copy of the Supreme Court judgment and had commenced its review.
The commission said it had received complaints and representations from political parties, aspirants and members of the National Assembly concerning the possible implications of the judgment.
INEC, however, has not announced a blanket cancellation of nominations or declared that specific candidates have automatically lost their places on the ballot.
Instead, the commission is examining the judgment and its implications before taking further decisions.
Candidates watch INEC’s next move
The Supreme Court verdict has generated fresh uncertainty among some political parties and aspirants whose primaries, congresses or membership arrangements took place while the Court of Appeal judgment was in force.
The central question is whether, and to what extent, the restored provisions will affect internal party processes already conducted during that period.
Some political parties and affected aspirants are now waiting for INEC’s interpretation of the judgment, particularly as the commission works towards the finalisation of the electoral process for the 2027 elections.
Reports indicate that the commission is expected to assess affected nominations individually against the provisions restored by the Supreme Court rather than rely solely on interpretations circulating outside the commission.
What the verdict means for 2027
The Supreme Court’s decision has effectively returned the disputed provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 to operation.
For political parties, the judgment places renewed emphasis on the accuracy and timely submission of membership registers and compliance with the statutory requirements governing party primaries and nominations.
For INEC, the challenge is to translate the court’s decision into clear electoral guidelines without creating unnecessary uncertainty around the 2027 election timetable.
The commission’s review therefore becomes an important next step in determining how the judgment will affect candidates and party processes already undertaken.
Until INEC concludes that review and communicates its position, questions surrounding some nominations are likely to remain open.
The development places both political parties and aspirants on notice as preparations for the 2027 general elections enter a more legally sensitive phase.
