Federal High Court Abuja has dismissed a suit by the National Democratic Congress, NDC seeking to nullify provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 relating to the qualification and disqualification of candidates for elective positions.
In a judgement delivered on Tuesday, Justice Muhammed Umar ruled that the case was without merit, holding that the disputed sections of the Electoral Act are consistent with the 1999 Constitution and merely complement its provisions.
The NDC had instituted the suit, against the Attorney-General of the Federation, the Clerk of the National Assembly, President of the Senate Godswill Akpabio and the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC.
The party asked the court to declare Sections 138 and 77(5) of the Electoral Act 2026 unconstitutional, while also seeking a pronouncement that issues concerning a candidate’s qualification could still be litigated after an election.
Justice Umar, however, upheld the preliminary objections challenging the competence of the action.
He held that the suit merely sought the court’s interpretation of constitutional and statutory provisions and did not qualify as a pre-election matter simply because INEC’s election timetable was attached to the originating processes.
The judge also struck out the case against the Clerk of the National Assembly after finding that the plaintiff failed to comply with the mandatory requirement of serving a pre-action notice before filing the suit.
On the substantive issues, the court ruled that while the Constitution outlines the qualifications and disqualifications for elective offices, the Electoral Act provides the procedure and timeframe for challenging the outcome of party primaries.
Justice Umar held that anyone seeking to contest the qualification of a candidate who emerged from a party primary must do so within the pre-election window provided by law.
He further found that Section 138 of the Electoral Act does not conflict with the Constitution but instead reinforces its provisions.
The court also declined the request to invalidate Section 77(5), noting that the Court of Appeal had already settled the issue in an earlier judgment.
Justice Umar stressed that lower courts are bound by decisions of superior courts under the doctrine of judicial precedent.
(Follow AIT News on WhatsApp, AfricaIndependentTV on YouTube, ait_online on Facebook and X (Formerly Twitter), and officialait on TikTok, Instagram and Threads)
(Editor: Terverr Tyav)
