…SDP Wins Partial Victory Over Candidate Submission Deadlines
The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has affirmed the constitutional powers of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to issue and alter election timetables for the conduct of elections in the country.
Justice James Omotosho, who delivered the judgement in a suit instituted by the Social Democratic Party (SDP), however ruled that the electoral umpire cannot abridge statutory timelines expressly provided in the Electoral Act 2026.
The court consequently ordered INEC to amend aspects of its 2027 Election Timetable and Schedule of Activities to comply strictly with relevant provisions of the law.
The SDP had approached the court challenging the powers of INEC to prescribe timelines for party primaries and submission of membership registers ahead of the 2027 general elections.
The party argued that the commission exceeded its powers by fixing deadlines allegedly inconsistent with Sections 29(1), 31, 82 and 84(1) of the Electoral Act 2026.
Among other reliefs, the plaintiff sought an order restraining INEC from enforcing timelines that conflict with provisions of the Electoral Act.
In its defence, INEC maintained that its constitutional responsibilities extend beyond merely monitoring party primaries, insisting that it possesses powers to organise, supervise and regulate electoral activities through issuance of election timetables.
The commission further argued that the timetable was designed to ensure orderliness and compliance with the Electoral Act, adding that the suit filed by the SDP was premature and speculative.
Delivering judgement, Justice Omotosho held that election timetables are valid subsidiary legislations issued pursuant to Section 151 of the Electoral Act 2026.
According to the judge, election timetables are not limited to voting dates alone, but also cover preparatory activities such as submission of membership registers, conduct of party primaries, nomination of candidates and other electoral processes leading to the main election.
He noted that without such timelines, the nation’s electoral system would descend into confusion and disorder.
The court declared that INEC possesses the legal authority to issue and even alter election timetables where necessary to give effect to the Constitution and provisions of the Electoral Act.
Justice Omotosho also referenced Section 285(14) of the 1999 Constitution as amended, which he said supports the commission’s powers in electoral administration.
However, the judge faulted portions of the revised timetable issued by INEC, particularly deadlines relating to withdrawal and substitution of candidates.
The court held that Section 31 of the Electoral Act clearly provides that political parties can submit notices of withdrawal and sworn affidavits of candidates not later than 90 days before an election.
Justice Omotosho observed that some dates fixed by INEC effectively reduced the statutory period guaranteed by law, thereby rendering such provisions inconsistent with the Electoral Act.
He ruled that the commission acted outside its powers by shortening timelines already fixed by statute.
The court further declared void the deadlines of August 29, 2026 and September 16, 2026 earlier fixed by INEC for submission of nomination forms for presidential, National Assembly, governorship and House of Assembly elections to the extent of their inconsistency with Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act.
Justice Omotosho therefore ordered INEC to amend the affected portions of the timetable in compliance with Sections 29(1) and 31 of the Electoral Act 2026.
The judge nonetheless upheld the powers of INEC to request membership registers from political parties and fix timelines for the conduct of party primaries.
The suit by the SDP was consequently held to have succeeded in part.
