THE Supreme Court, on Thursday, September 24, upheld the appeal filed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) against a Court of Appeal judgment voiding parts of the Electoral Act 2026 on political party primaries and membership registers.
A seven-member panel, led by Justice Adamu Jauro, set aside the Court of Appeal’s decision in favour of the Zenith Labour Party (ZLP), and affirmed the judgment of the trial court, which had ruled that Sections 77(5) and 84 of the Electoral Act do not conflict with the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and awarded N2million in costs against ZLP.
According to the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN), the apex court, in two other judgments, also dismissed two separate appeals filed by Social Democratic Party (SDP) and Youth Party (YP) against INEC, challenging the decisions of the court of appeal in their cases.
In SDP vs. INEC, the appeal was heard on its merit and was accordingly dismissed by the court, while in the case of YP, it uphold preliminary objection filed by INEC and the appeal was struck out for being incompetent, describing the appeal as invalid and incompetent, having been filed out of time by one day.
Recall that a Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Mohammed Umar, had dismissed YP’s action in its May 5 judgment.
Dissatisfied, ZLP appealed and the court of appeal, in its judgment delivered on July 16, allowed the appeal in part and voided provisions of the Electoral Act relating to party primaries and membership register.
The appellate court’s decision prompted INEC to approach the apex court.
ZLP, had at the trial court, challenged the provisions of the Electoral Act, describing it as being inconsistent with the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
In its appeal, INEC urged the court to dismiss the appeal filed by YP and SDP bordering on Sections 77(5), 77(6), 77(7) and 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026.
Sections 77(5), 77(6) and 77(7) concern the statutory requirements relating to political parties’ membership registers, while Section 84(2) prescribes direct primaries or consensus as methods for the nomination of candidates by political parties.
The ZLP had argued at the trial court that the provisions conflicted with the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and amounted to unconstitutional interference in the internal affairs of political parties.
Its case was anchored, among others, on Sections 221 and 222 of the Constitution, which provides for the constitutional framework governing political parties.
Following the dismissal of the case by the trial court, ZLP appealled, leading to the Court of Appeal’s July 16 judgment.
