- The Court of Appeal in Abuja has set aside a prior Federal High Court judgment that nullified parts of the Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) guidelines for the 2027 general elections.
- The appellate court ruled that the Youth Party, which initially filed the suit challenging INEC’s regulatory timelines, lacked the legal standing (locus standi) to institute the case.
- A three-member judicial panel declared that the lower court’s decision to nullify party primary schedules and registration guidelines occasioned a clear miscarriage of justice.
The Court of Appeal in Abuja on Thursday set aside a controversial Federal High Court judgment that had previously nullified critical sections of the Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) guidelines for the upcoming 2027 general elections.
Eko Hot Blog reports that the three-member appellate panel unanimously ruled that the Youth Party, which had instituted the legal challenge against the electoral body, lacked the necessary locus standi (legal standing) to file the suit.
EDITOR’S PICK
- Why Africa Still Cannot Win the FIFA World Cup Despite Its World Class Talent
- Man Allegedly Slits Father’s Throat, Mutilates Body in Anambra
- Lagos Court Convicts Director, Company Over N822.4m Fraudulent Conversion
The court emphasized that the political party failed to demonstrate any direct injury, administrative disadvantage, or negative impact on its members regarding the preparation and submission of candidate lists for the 2027 polls.
The lead judgment, prepared by Justice Adebukola Banjoko and read in open court by Justice Okon Abang, stated that a plaintiff must show clear, tangible injury rather than academic concerns to justify challenging public regulatory frameworks.
The justices concluded that the trial court should not have entertained the suit in the first place without this critical legal foundation.
The appeal stemmed from a May 20 judgment delivered by Justice Mohammed Garba Umar of the Federal High Court.
In that ruling, the trial court had declared that INEC lacked the constitutional power to mandate political parties to hold their primaries within strict timelines set by the commission.
Justice Umar had also struck down provisions in INEC’s timetable requiring parties to submit their official membership registers and candidate credentials before the dates laid out in the Electoral Act, ruling that the commission could not legally abridge statutory timelines.
Dissatisfied with the trial court’s decision, INEC, through its lead counsel, Dr. Alex Izinyom, filed an appeal.
The electoral umpire argued that the Federal High Court had committed a grave error by ignoring the commission’s preliminary objections and delivering a judgment based on hypothetical and academic scenarios, thereby denying the commission a fair hearing.
The Court of Appeal agreed with INEC’s position, holding that Justice Umar’s ruling erred in law and caused a miscarriage of justice.
By vacating the Federal High Court’s judgment, the appellate court has fully restored the legitimacy and binding authority of INEC’s electoral guidelines and timetables.
This ruling provides much-needed regulatory clarity for political parties and stakeholders as preparations for the 2027 general elections intensify.
