INEC argued that the high court erred in law when it failed to pronounce on the jurisdictional issue of the suit being hypothetic and academic, and a denial of fair hearing to the appellant.
FILE PHOTO: INEC’s Chairman, Joash Amupitan (centre), and other top INEC officials. Credit: X/@inecnigeria
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is asking the Court of Appeal, Abuja, to set aside the judgment of the Federal High Court, Abuja, which nullified part of the election guidelines put in place by the agency for the conduct of the 2027 general election.
In a motion on notice attached to the appeal, INEC prayed the court for an order staying the execution and/or further execution of the judgment of the High Court delivered on 20th May, 2026, pending the hearing and determination of the appeal it filed against the judgment at the Court of Appeal.
READ ALSO: Court Voids INEC Timetable For 2027 Party Primaries, Submission Of Membership Registers
Justice Muhammed Umar of the Federal High Court, Abuja, had nullified guidelines issued by the INEC, directing political parties to submit their membership registers and databases by May 10 as a condition for participation in the 2027 general elections.
A political party, the Youth Party, had filed a suit challenging the legality of the electoral body’s directive.
The court said in its judgment that INEC could not lawfully shorten the timeline already provided under Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act 2026 for the submission of party membership records and candidates’ particulars.
But in the appeal dated May 25, 2026, filed by INEC, through its counsel, Alex Izinyon, the electoral body prayed the court to set aside the judgment.
The senior advocate, in the appeal, is also asking the court to stay the execution of the judgment.
In the appeal, the electoral umpire raised nine grounds of appeal.
INEC argued that the high court erred in law when it failed to pronounce on the jurisdictional issue of the suit being hypothetic and academic, and a denial of fair hearing to the appellant.
The electoral body prayed the court to set aside the judgment.
In the appeal, the lawyer said the lower court erred in law when it held: “It is clear from the wording of Sections 29(1), 82, and 84 of the Electoral Act, 2026, the following can be understood. Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026 mandates political parties to submit the names of candidates first in the prescribed forms of the candidates who emerged from its valid primaries, which such political party intends to sponsor at the elections, not later than 120 days before the date of the General election.
“What is required of political parties to do under the Electoral Act, 2026 is to notify the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) 21 days before the holding of its primaries, congresses, or conventions, conference, or meeting convened for the election of its executive committees, other governing bodies, or nominating candidates.
“The defendant is not mandated to impose a timeframe for political parties to conduct their primaries, provided that it will be done and submitted not later than the 120 days provided by the Electoral Act, 2026. See Section 82(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026.”
He said the judgment of the trial court is against the weight of evidence placed before it and therefore prayed the court for an order allowing the appeal and setting aside the Judgement delivered by the trial Federal High Court, sitting in Abuja.
He also prayed for an order of the court, striking out the suit as the respondent lacks the locus standi to institute and maintain the same, describing the suit as being academic.
The Federal High Court in Abuja had invalidated the timeline issued by INEC for the conduct of primaries and the nomination of candidates, ahead of the 2027 general election.
In a judgment delivered by Justice Mohammed Umar, it also set aside the INEC’s May 10 deadline requiring political parties to submit a register and database of all their members as a condition for qualifying to participate in the general elections.
The court held that the time frame the electoral umpire announced for political parties to conduct their primaries and to submit, withdraw, or replace the names and particulars of their candidates for the general elections “is inconsistent with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026.”
