The Federal High Court in Abuja has affirmed that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has the legal authority to fix timelines within which political parties must conduct their primaries ahead of the 2027 general elections, even as the commission moves to challenge a separate judgment that had earlier nullified parts of its election guidelines.
The ruling was delivered by Justice J.K. Omotosho in Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/720/2026 filed by the Social Democratic Party, which challenged aspects of INEC’s timetable and election schedule for the 2027 polls.
A Certified True Copy of the judgment obtained by SaharaReporters showed that the document was dated May 26, 2026, indicating the date the certified copy was released.
In the judgment, the court held that INEC is empowered under the Constitution and the Electoral Act 2026 to issue election timetables that include deadlines for political party primaries and related preparatory activities.
However, Justice Omotosho stressed that while INEC can set such timelines, it cannot shorten statutory deadlines provided under the law, particularly those relating to candidate submissions and substitutions.
“This honourable court hereby declares that Election Timetable is a chain of events or actions which include submission of membership register of political parties to be used for the purpose of primaries and fix timeframes within which political parties are to organize their primary Elections for the purpose of the stated 2027 Election,” the court ruled.
The judge further held that INEC is constitutionally empowered to issue and modify election timetables where necessary.
“This honourable court hereby declares that the Independent National Electoral Commission is empowered by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) and the Electoral Act, 2026 to issue timetable for elections and to even alter same as it deems fit,” the judgment stated.
The court also affirmed that requesting membership registers from political parties and setting deadlines for primaries were within INEC’s legal powers.
“This honourable court hereby declares that the Defendant requesting for membership register of Political parties and giving timeframe within which to conduct primaries is not ultra vires the powers of the Defendant,” Justice Omotosho ruled.
However, the court restricted INEC from shortening statutory timelines, holding that the commission cannot override provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 relating to candidate submissions and substitutions.
Against this backdrop, the judgment comes amid a parallel legal battle, as INEC is currently challenging a separate ruling delivered by Justice Muhammed Umar of the Federal High Court, which had earlier voided portions of the commission’s election guidelines.
In that earlier ruling, delivered last Wednesday, Justice Umar had set aside INEC’s directive requiring political parties to submit membership registers and databases by May 10 as a condition for participation in the 2027 elections.
The case was filed by the Youth Party, which argued that INEC exceeded its powers under the Electoral Act 2026.
Justice Umar had held that INEC cannot lawfully shorten the timeline provided under Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act 2026 for submission of candidates’ particulars and party records.
Dissatisfied with that judgment, INEC, in a motion on notice filed alongside its appeal dated May 25, 2026, has asked the Court of Appeal in Abuja to set aside the decision of the lower court.
The electoral body, through its counsel, Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Alex Izinyon, is also seeking an order staying the execution of the judgment pending the determination of its appeal.
INEC is reportedly advancing nine grounds of appeal against the ruling, insisting that its guidelines were lawfully issued to guide electoral preparations and ensure compliance with constitutional and statutory requirements.
The two judgments now present differing judicial interpretations, one affirming INEC’s authority to fix timelines for party primaries, as held by Justice Omotosho, and the other limiting the commission’s powers by barring it from imposing deadlines that conflict with statutory provisions, as ruled by Justice Muhammed Umar in a decision currently under appeal.
