The Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a suit filed by the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) seeking the removal of Sections 138 and 77(5) of the Electoral Act, 2026.
Justice Mohammed Umar, who delivered the judgment on Tuesday, ruled that the party’s case lacked merit, stating that the contested provisions of the new electoral law complement the 1999 Constitution rather than contradict it.
The NDC had approached the court, arguing that the two sections of the Act, which was recently passed by the National Assembly and signed into law by President Bola Tinubu, were inconsistent with constitutional provisions on election qualification and political participation.
The party, in suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/635/2026, listed the Attorney-General of the Federation, the Clerk of the National Assembly, Senate President Godswill Akpabio, and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as defendants.
In its application, the party asked the court to nullify Section 138 of the Electoral Act, arguing that it removed qualification issues as grounds for challenging the election of candidates. It also challenged Section 77(5), claiming it violated constitutional rights relating to political association and party participation.
However, Justice Umar disagreed with the arguments, holding that the Electoral Act provisions were designed to provide procedures for addressing disputes arising from party primaries and did not conflict with constitutional requirements.
The judge noted that the Constitution determines eligibility for elective positions, while the Electoral Act establishes the process and timeline for handling disputes over party primaries.
According to him, anyone challenging a candidate’s qualification based on issues from party primaries must do so during the pre-election period.
Justice Umar also dismissed the argument that attaching INEC’s election timetable to the suit made it a pre-election matter, saying the case did not fall under the provisions of Section 285 of the Constitution.
He further upheld objections against the suit’s competence, ruling that the NDC failed to serve the required pre-action notice on the Clerk of the National Assembly before filing the case. Consequently, the action against the clerk was struck out.
On Section 77(5), the judge said the issue had already been addressed by the Court of Appeal, stressing that lower courts are bound by decisions from higher courts.
During proceedings, INEC defended the validity of the Electoral Act, 2026, arguing that it was properly enacted by the National Assembly and assented to by President Tinubu in line with constitutional procedures.
The electoral body maintained that the law does not restrict citizens’ rights to form or join political parties, adding that the period provided for party primaries complied with the legal framework.
The Attorney-General of the Federation also opposed the NDC’s claims, arguing that the Electoral Act strengthens constitutional provisions rather than undermines them.
Similarly, the Clerk of the National Assembly and Senate President Akpabio argued that the suit was without merit, insisting that the new law was validly passed and properly gazetted.
The NDC, which was registered by INEC on February 5, 2026, had filed the case through its legal representative, Vicent Ottaokpukpu, on March 27, seeking amendments to the Electoral Act to restore qualification as a basis for challenging election outcomes.
Court Rejects NDC’s Challenge Against Key Provisions of 2026 Electoral Act
41
