* Commission to scrutinise NDC’s allegations * Says electronic records will expose source of disputed names Sunday Aborisade in Abuja The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has dismissed allegations by the
**Sunday Aborisade in Abuja **
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has dismissed allegations by the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) that its officials removed candidates nominated by the party for the 2027 general election and replaced them with names allegedly unknown to the party.
In a chat with THISDAY on Monday, the Chief Press Secretary and Media Adviser to the INEC Chairman, Adedayo Oketola, said the commission had neither the constitutional nor statutory authority to nominate candidates for political parties, insisting that the responsibility rests squarely with the parties.
Oketola, however, said the commission would scrutinise its electronic and documentary records concerning the constituencies identified by the NDC, particularly those in Anambra State, to establish how the disputed names came to appear on the candidate nomination portal.
He said the allegation that INEC officials “smuggled” candidates into the NDC’s list was too serious to be determined through speculation, stressing that the commission’s electronic audit trail could objectively establish the source and history of entries submitted through the portal.
Oketola said: “For the avoidance of doubt, INEC does not nominate candidates for political parties.
“The nomination of candidates is the responsibility of political parties, subject to compliance with the constitution, the Electoral Act 2026 and other applicable laws, Regulations and Guidelines.
“Similarly, the commission does not possess the legal authority to select a candidate for a political party or substitute its own preferred candidate for a person validly nominated by a political party in accordance with the law.”
The NDC had alleged that some of its candidates were removed from INEC’s list and replaced with persons the party claimed it neither nominated nor authorised to contest under its platform, particularly in some state House of Assembly constituencies in Anambra State.
But Oketola explained that the commission’s candidate nomination portal was specifically designed to receive candidates’ particulars from political parties through access credentials issued to them.
According to him, every activity undertaken through the portal is electronically recorded, making it possible to trace the history of entries and determine where and how particular names were submitted.
According to him, “The candidate nomination portal provided by the commission is the platform through which political parties submit the particulars of their candidates using access credentials issued for that purpose.
“Activities carried out in relation to the submission of candidates through the portal are electronically recorded and are capable of verification from the commission’s records and audit trail.
“It is therefore possible to establish objectively the history and source of entries relating to any candidate whose name appears on the portal.”
The INEC spokesman consequently urged the NDC to provide evidence if it had proof that any commission official interfered with its nomination process.
He said allegations that officials obtained Form EC9 directly from individual aspirants or candidates and subsequently uploaded their details without the authorisation of the party could be verified from INEC’s records.
Oketola said: “The allegation by the NDC that INEC officials went behind the party to obtain Form EC9 directly from individual aspirants or candidates and thereafter uploaded their particulars without the authority of the party is particularly serious.
“Such an allegation is capable of objective verification from the commission’s electronic and documentary records.
“Rather than make categorical assertions on matters that can readily be established from those records, the commission will examine the relevant records relating to the constituencies identified by the NDC.”
He added that where the party possessed evidence implicating any INEC official, it should submit such evidence and identify the officials involved to facilitate investigation.
He said: “If the party has evidence implicating any official of the commission in any unauthorised interference with its candidate nomination process, it should make such evidence and the particulars of the officials concerned available to the commission.
“Any credible allegation of misconduct by an official of the commission will be investigated in accordance with established procedures.”
Oketola also drew a distinction between INEC’s statutory responsibility to monitor party primaries and the actual nomination of candidates by political parties.
He explained that monitoring a party primary did not confer on INEC the power to determine which aspirant should eventually become the party’s candidate.
“The commission’s monitoring of a political party primary does not amount to nomination of a candidate by INEC.
“Neither does a report made by officials who monitor a primary confer upon the commission the power to choose a candidate for the political party.
“The monitoring process serves the statutory purposes prescribed by law and does not transfer the party’s responsibility for nomination to the commission,” he said.
According to him, disputes arising from party primaries, including questions over who validly emerged, the effect of appeals and attempts to alter the outcome of a nomination exercise, must be addressed within the framework of the Electoral Act 2026 and other relevant laws.
“Where questions arise as to the person who validly emerged from a political party primary, the effect of an appeal arising from that primary, or the validity of any subsequent attempt to alter the outcome of the nomination process, those questions must be resolved strictly within the framework of the Electoral Act 2026 and other applicable laws,” he said.
Oketola insisted that INEC had no institutional interest in which candidate any political party nominated, stressing that the commission’s responsibility was to administer the electoral process impartially and in accordance with the law.
He said: “INEC cannot assume the role of a political party in choosing its candidates, nor can it disregard applicable statutory requirements governing the nomination and submission of candidates.
“It is important, however, to emphasise that the commission has no institutional interest in the choice of candidate made by any political party.
“Its responsibility is to administer the electoral process impartially and in accordance with the constitution, the Electoral Act and applicable Regulations and Guidelines.”
He also placed responsibility on political parties to ensure that their nomination exercises, internal appeals and submission of candidates were conducted in accordance with the law and within the prescribed timelines.
“Political parties also have a corresponding responsibility to ensure that their nomination processes, internal appeals, submission of candidates and use of the commission’s candidate nomination portal are undertaken strictly in accordance with the law and within the prescribed timelines,” he said.
The commission, he added, would continue to address legitimate concerns about the candidate nomination process based on verifiable records rather than allegations.
“INEC will continue to discharge its responsibilities transparently, impartially and in accordance with the rule of law.
“Where legitimate concerns are raised concerning the candidate nomination process, the commission will address them on the basis of its records and the applicable law.
“The commission will neither nominate candidates for political parties nor lend itself to the imposition of candidates on any political party,” Oketola said.
Follow the story
