INEC shifts 2027 candidate eligibility battle to the courts

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has stated that the courts, rather than the Commission, will ultimately determine the eligibility of candidates whose names were excluded from the recently published list for the 2027 governorship and State Assembly elections.

The Commission has given aggrieved political parties and candidates a 14-day window to file petitions for redress. Mohammed Haruna, National Commissioner and Chairman of the Information and Voter Education Committee, said INEC did not disqualify candidates. Instead, he argued that parties disqualified themselves by failing to meet constitutional requirements, as affirmed by a Supreme Court judgment mandating them to submit a membership register containing the names of their candidates.

“At the end of the day, we are not the courts. Any position we take is based on our own interpretation of a case. If somebody is not happy with what we have done, of course they can go to court. If the courts say INEC, you are wrong, even if we think we are right, we have no choice but to obey the court order,” Haruna told newsmen.

He explained that INEC had originally fixed April 21 for the submission of the membership register but extended it to May 10. “If the names of the candidates were not found in the register submitted by them, it means the parties were not qualified to submit the name of the candidate.”

Read also: Court presses Tunji-Ojo, interior minister, for response in NYSC records disclosure suit

“We have given them a 14-day rule, saying that if they think we were wrong in removing the names of their candidates, they should write a petition to us, and so many petitions have been coming in already. We will re-examine them and ensure the proper thing is done,” Haruna added.

 Monday Ubani, Dr a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), said from his understanding of the Certified True Copy of the Supreme Court ruling in INEC v. Zenith Labour Party & Others, it lies within the power of the court and not INEC to determine the candidate of any party.

Ubani argued that the judgment did not authorise the automatic disqualification of any candidate based on Section 77(5)-(7) of the Electoral Act. According to him, the Supreme Court made a distinction between the personal qualification or disqualification of a candidate and the statutory eligibility of a political party to field a candidate.

“Where a candidate’s name is not contained in the party’s membership register, the consequence is a matter relating to irregularity in the nomination and primary process. It does not, by that fact alone, constitute a personal qualification or disqualification of the candidate,” he said.

Similarly, where a party fails to submit its membership register in time under Section 77(7), the consequence affects the party’s eligibility, not the personal disqualification of its candidates.

Read also: Hunger as obstacle to rejection of pre-election ‘sweeteners’ by Nigerians

Ubani stressed that Section 88(2) of the Electoral Act provides a judicial remedy for non-compliance in the conduct of primaries, and it is “legally unsafe to transform every breach of Section 77 into an automatic disqualification which INEC can impose administratively.” He added that Section 29 requires parties to submit a list of candidates who emerged from validly conducted primaries, but does not confer on INEC general judicial jurisdiction to conclusively determine the validity of primaries.

“What the Supreme Court did not do was to confer upon INEC an automatic judicial power to disqualify a candidate merely because INEC considers that Section 77(5), (6) or (7) has not been complied with. The ultimate determination of a disputed nomination, when properly brought before the court, remains a matter for the judiciary,” Ubani said.

Affected political parties are challenging INEC’s decision. The Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) stated that it has petitioned INEC and is also seeking legal redress. Osa Director, National Publicity Secretary, said: “The NDC has formally written to INEC to restore the names of our governorship candidates on the list. They met all constitutional and legal requirements. Therefore, we are going to use all legal means to ensure the right thing is done.”

Supporters of the Kwankwasiyya movement recently staged a protest in Kano over the omission of Aminu Abdulsalam Gwarzo. Led by Mustapha Kwankwaso, the deputy governorship candidate, they marched to INEC’s office and submitted a petition demanding reinstatement. Kwankwaso said the party fulfilled all rules for nomination, describing the exclusion as unjust.

Isa Ali Pantami, whose emergence as a Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) member and governorship candidate was validated by the court, has also petitioned INEC through his counsel, Ahmed Raji, SAN.

“It is settled law, binding on the Commission, that the removal of a nominated candidate’s name is exclusively a judicial act,” Raji argued, citing Dingyadi & Anor v. INEC & Ors (2011) and other cases.

INEC published the list of governorship and Assembly candidates on its website on October 9, 2026. The list, signed by Rose Oriaran-Anthony, INEC Secretary, cleared some prominent names including Rivers governorship candidate Kingsley Chinda, despite controversy over his All Progressives Congress (APC) membership while omitting others.

Notable omissions included Ladi Adebutu PDP governorship candidates (Ogun State) and Isa Ali Pantami (Gombe State). Also left off the list were Aminu Abdulsalam Gwarzo (Kano) and Musa Shugaba-Abdullahi (Nasarawa). NDC candidates

The publication sparked allegations that INEC’s vetting process lacked thoroughness, prompting the Commission to establish a 14-day window ending October 24 for aggrieved parties to petition for redress.