Federal High Court Abuja has affirmed the authority of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC to prepare and revise election timetables for the conduct of elections in Nigeria.
While delivering judgement in a suit instituted by the Social Democratic Party, SDP, Justice James Omotosho held that INEC acted within its constitutional and statutory powers when it issued the timetable and schedule of activities for the 2027 general elections.
The case, challenged several aspects of the timetable released by the electoral body, particularly the deadlines fixed for political party primaries, submission of membership registers, and nomination processes.
Justice Omotosho in the judgement explained that the Electoral Act 2026 empowers INEC to formulate regulations and guidelines necessary for implementing the provisions of the law, including issuing election schedules.
According to the judge, an election timetable goes beyond merely fixing dates for voting. He said it also covers essential preparatory activities such as party primaries, submission of membership registers, candidate nominations, withdrawals, and substitutions.
He noted that these processes are necessary to ensure orderliness and coordination in the electoral system, warning that the absence of such a framework could create confusion during election preparations.
The court further stated that the constitutional backing for INEC’s powers can also be found in Section 285(14) of the 1999 Constitution as amended.
However, the judge ruled that while INEC possesses the authority to issue and amend election timetables, such powers must be exercised strictly within the limits set by the Electoral Act.
Justice Omotosho faulted aspects of the revised timetable that shortened the statutory period allowed for the withdrawal and substitution of candidates.
The court observed that Section 31 of the Electoral Act 2026 permits political parties to submit notices of candidate withdrawal up to 90 days before an election. However, the dates fixed by INEC in the revised schedule effectively reduced that timeframe.
The judge held that INEC exceeded its powers by abridging the period provided by law, declaring the affected portions of the timetable invalid.
He also ruled that the deadlines fixed for submission of nomination forms for presidential, National Assembly, governorship, and state assembly elections were inconsistent with Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act, which requires parties to submit names of candidates at least 120 days before elections.
Consequently, the court directed INEC to review and amend the 2027 election timetable to bring it into conformity with the relevant provisions of the Electoral Act 2026.
Justice Omotosho nevertheless upheld INEC’s authority to request membership registers from political parties and to specify timelines for the conduct of party primaries.
The SDP had approached the court seeking clarification on whether INEC’s monitoring powers over party primaries also gave it the authority to determine the timetable within which political parties must conduct those primaries.
Although the party succeeded partly in its claims, the court dismissed INEC’s argument that the suit was filed outside the legally permitted period, holding that the cause of action arose from the commission’s press statement issued on March 27, while the suit was filed on April 9.
(Editor: Terverr Tyav)
