Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has asked the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal to reverse the judgement of a Federal High Court, Abuja, which nullified part of its guidelines for the conduct of the 2027 general elections.

INEC also filed a motion praying the appellate court for an order staying the execution and/or further execution of the judgement of the trial court, pending the hearing and determination of its appeal.

Justice Muhammed Umar of the Federal High Court, Abuja, had last week nullified the revised time-table of the commission, which had directed political parties to submit their membership registers and databases by May 10 as a condition for participation in the 2027 general election.

The trial court’s order was made while delivering judgement in the suit filed by Youth Party, challenging the legality of the electoral body’s directive.

The trial court held 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.

Dissatisfied, the commission, on May 25, approached the appellate court to upturn the decision of the trial court.

The commission, through its team of lawyers led by Chief Alex Izinyon, SAN, in its nine grounds of appeal, argued that the trial court erred in law when it failed to pronounce on the jurisdictional issue of the suit being hypothetic and academic, which failure occasioned denial of fair hearing to the appellant.

Izinyon submitted, “It is clear from the wordings 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 in prescribed forms of the candidates who emerged from its valid primaries which such political party intend 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, days before the holding of its primaries, congresses or conventions, conference or meeting convened for election of its executive committees, other governing bodies or nominating candidates.

“The defendant is not mandated to impose 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.”

The senior lawyer also claimed that the judgement of the trial court was against the weight of evidence placed before it and, therefore, prayed the court for an order allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgement of the trial court.

INEC asked the appellate court to strike out the suit on the grounds that the respondent lacked the locus standi to institute and maintain same.

Umar had in his judgement last week held that “going by the provisions of Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026 which requires political parties to submit the personal particulars of their candidates not later than 120 days to an election, INEC cannot lawfully abridge or limit that statutory period by prescribing a shorter timeframe in its 2027 election timetable”.

Similarly, citing Section 31 of the Electoral Act, 2026, which permits political parties to withdraw and substitute candidates not later than 90 days to the conduct of an election, the court had held that INEC lacked the powers to abridge or limit that statutory period by fixing earlier deadline for the withdrawal and replacement of candidates in its 2027 election timetable.

Umar in addition held that by the provisions of Section 32 of the Electoral Act, 2026, INEC did not possess the statutory power to publish the final list of candidates for the 2027 general election before the 60 days minimum period prescribed by law.

He held, “A Declaration is made that upon the proper construction of Section 98 of the Electoral Act, 2026, the defendant does not possess the statutory authority to fix in its timetable for the 2027 general elections for campaign to end 2 days before the elections.

“A Declaration is made that upon the proper interpretation to Section 33 of the Electoral Act, 2026, the time frame prescribed by the Defendant for submission of membership registers for the conduct of primary elections is NOT applicable to primary elections conducted for the purpose of replacing withdrawn candidates.”

The judge subsequently made an order, “setting aside or nullifying the time-frames imposed by the defendant in its Revised Timetable and Schedule of Activities for 2027 General Election for the conduct of primary elections by political parties for the 2027 general elections, the submission of personal particulars of candidates by their political parties for the 2027 general elections, the withdrawal and replacement of candidates by political parties for the 2027 general elections, the publication of the final list of candidates for the 2027 general elections and campaigning for the 2027 general elections which is inconsistent with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026.”

Alex Enumah