Supreme Court restores Electoral Act rules on primaries and party registers

Updated 10:41 WAT, 30 Sep 2026: This story now reflects that reports differ on the size of the Supreme Court panel and on who delivered the lead judgment.

The Supreme Court has handed the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) an important win ahead of the 2027 general elections. On Thursday, 24 September, the court allowed INEC’s appeal and restored four provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 that the Court of Appeal had struck down in July.

Accounts of the bench differ. Reports on the day, including the News Agency of Nigeria’s carried by P.M. News, described a seven-member panel presided over by Justice Adamu Jauro. ThisDay, reporting on the certified true copy of the judgment, says five justices sat and that Justice Emmanuel Agim delivered the lead judgment. The accounts agree on the outcome.

The court held that the disputed sections “do not conflict with the 1999 Constitution”. It set aside the Court of Appeal judgment of 16 July, restored the Federal High Court decision of 5 May that had dismissed the challenge, and awarded N2 million in costs against the Zenith Labour Party (ZLP), which brought the original suit.

Two related appeals also failed. The Social Democratic Party’s appeal was dismissed on its merits, while the Youth Party’s was struck out as incompetent because it was filed one day late.

What the restored rules say

• Section 77(5): only members listed on a party register submitted to INEC at least 21 days before a primary can take part in it.
• Section 77(6): parties must use that same register for their primaries, congresses and conventions.
• Section 77(7): a party that fails to submit its register within the set period cannot field candidates.
• Section 84(2): candidates must emerge through direct primaries or consensus, which removes the indirect, delegate-based option.

Why it matters now

With the presidential and National Assembly elections scheduled for 16 January 2027, parties have already picked most of their candidates. That raises a practical question: does the ruling reopen those nominations?

Lawyers are not fully agreed. Dr Abiodun Layonu (SAN), quoted by Tribune, said the court had authoritatively settled that the provisions are valid. Others stress a distinction: confirming that the law is constitutional is not the same as deciding whether a particular candidate complied with it, which would still have to be tested case by case in court. Some commentators also question how much say parties should keep over who finally carries their ticket once members have voted in a direct primary.

For voters, the practical effect is that the membership register has become a central document. If you want a say in your party’s choices in future, make sure your name is on the register your party submits to INEC.

What next: Watch for INEC guidance on how it will apply the judgment, and for pre-election suits testing whether individual candidates met the register and primary rules.