Electoral Act ruling: Duke, Chinda, Omo-Agege, others face nomination questions

The Supreme Court’s restoration of four provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 has renewed questions over the validity of some party nomination processes ahead of the 2027 elections.

A seven-member panel led by Justice Adamu Jauro, on September 24, upheld the Independent National Electoral Commission’s appeal and restored sections 77(5), 77(6), 77(7) and 84(2) of the law.

The apex court held that the provisions were not inconsistent with the 1999 Constitution and consequently overturned the July 16 decision of the Court of Appeal that had declared them unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court also restored the Federal High Court judgment dismissing the challenge brought by the Zenith Labour Party and awarded N2m in costs against the party.

What the restored provisions say

Section 77(5) requires political parties to submit their membership registers to INEC at least 21 days before a primary, congress or convention, with only members listed in the register eligible to participate.

Section 77(6) requires parties to use the submitted register for their primaries, congresses and conventions, while section 77(7) provides that a party that fails to submit its register within the stipulated period cannot field a candidate for the election.

Section 84(2), meanwhile, provides for the nomination of candidates through direct primaries or consensus.

The Zenith Labour Party had challenged the provisions at the Federal High Court, arguing that they interfered with the constitutional autonomy of political parties and conflicted with sections 221 and 222 of the Constitution.

The Federal High Court dismissed the suit in May, but the Court of Appeal later voided the disputed provisions, prompting INEC to approach the Supreme Court.

What the ruling means for candidates

The judgment did not name or disqualify any candidate, meaning that the effect on individual politicians will depend on the circumstances surrounding their party membership and nomination.

Among politicians whose nomination processes have attracted questions are former Cross River State governor, Donald Duke; Kingsley Chinda; former minister of communications and digital economy, Isa Pantami; former deputy Senate president, Ovie Omo-Agege; and former Delta State House of Assembly speaker, Victor Ochei.

Donald Duke

Former Cross River State governor, Donald Duke, joined the Peoples Redemption Party shortly before its May 25 presidential primary and subsequently emerged as its candidate.

PRP presidential aspirant, Yakubu Kingsley, later challenged Duke’s nomination, alleging that he was not listed in the party’s membership register submitted to INEC on May 4, 21 days before the primary.

Donald Duke

The dispute therefore raises questions about whether Duke satisfied the membership requirement contained in the restored provision.

Kingsley Chinda

Kingsley Chinda emerged as the All Progressives Congress governorship candidate in Rivers State on May 21 after previously representing the Obio/Akpor Federal Constituency in the House of Representatives.

His emergence attracted attention because he appeared before the APC screening panel shortly before the primary without publicly announcing his defection from the Peoples Democratic Party at the time.

Kingsley Chinda

His resignation as minority leader of the House of Representatives was later made public, with the letter dated April 23, 2026, raising questions about the timing of his party membership and the APC register submitted to INEC.

Isa Pantami

Former minister of communications and digital economy, Isa Pantami, initially emerged as the PDP governorship candidate in Gombe State through a voice-affirmation process in May.

Isa Pantami

The Federal High Court subsequently nullified that process and ordered the party to conduct a fresh primary, after which the PDP scheduled another exercise for September 29.

Pantami subsequently won the fresh primary, polling 817 votes according to TheCable, after the earlier process had been nullified.

Ovie Omo-Agege

Former deputy Senate president, Ovie Omo-Agege, contested the APC Delta Central senatorial primary in May but lost to Ede Dafinone.

Ovie Omo-Agege

He resigned from the APC on May 22 and joined the Nigeria Democratic Congress, which subsequently granted him a waiver to contest its Delta Central senatorial primary.

Omo-Agege later secured the ticket through a consensus arrangement, bringing his nomination within the broader questions surrounding membership registers and statutory requirements.

Victor Ochei

Former Delta State House of Assembly speaker, Victor Ochei, similarly left the APC after its nomination process and joined the NDC in May.

Victor Ochei

The NDC subsequently granted Ochei a waiver to contest its Delta North senatorial primary, where he secured the party’s ticket.

What a waiver can and cannot do

Lawyer and policy specialist Yusuf Manjo said the crucial questions in individual cases include whether a candidate satisfied the applicable membership requirements, participated in the relevant nomination process and emerged through a valid primary.

“A political party may, where its constitution or applicable guidelines permit, waive certain internal party requirements. However, a political party cannot simply waive a mandatory requirement imposed directly by an Act of the National Assembly,” Manjo said.

“Consequently, whenever the expression ‘waiver’ is used, the first question should be: What requirement was waived, and where does that requirement originate?

“If it is merely an internal party requirement, the party’s constitution and guidelines may determine whether waiver is permissible. However, if it is a mandatory statutory requirement under the Electoral Act, a party cannot override the law by calling it a waiver.”

Can INEC remove a candidate?

Manjo said INEC has administrative responsibilities concerning elections, but disputes over the validity of individual nominations may ultimately require judicial determination.

“A general declaration that a statutory provision is valid is therefore not the same thing as a judicial declaration that a named candidate violated that provision,” he said.

He added that substitution cases would require separate examination, including whether a candidate validly withdrew, whether a fresh primary was necessary, which membership register applied and whether the subsequent nomination complied with the Electoral Act and relevant party rules.

The Supreme Court’s restoration of the provisions therefore establishes the statutory framework that parties must comply with, while the legality of particular nominations remains dependent on the facts and any subsequent judicial proceedings.

The post Electoral Act ruling: Duke, Chinda, Omo-Agege, others face nomination questions appeared first on WITHIN NIGERIA.