By John Azu
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has approached the Court of Appeal in Abuja to overturn a Federal High Court judgment that nullified parts of its guidelines and timetable for the 2027 general elections.
The electoral commission is also seeking an order staying the execution of the judgment pending the determination of its appeal.
INEC’s appeal, dated May 25, 2026, was filed through its counsel, Alex Izinyon (SAN), and is anchored on nine grounds challenging the decision delivered by Justice Mohammed Umar of the Federal High Court on May 20.
Justice Umar had ruled in favour of the Young Party, which challenged aspects of INEC’s election timetable and guidelines. The court held that while INEC has constitutional powers to supervise and monitor party primaries, those powers do not extend to fixing timelines in a manner that effectively alters provisions of the Electoral Act 2026.
The judge specifically held that INEC could not lawfully shorten the timeframe provided under Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act for political parties to submit membership registers and particulars of candidates.
The court also faulted portions of the timetable issued by INEC for the conduct of political activities ahead of the 2027 elections, holding that the commission exceeded its statutory powers.
Dissatisfied with the ruling, INEC argued before the appellate court that the trial judge failed to properly interpret its constitutional and statutory mandate to organise elections and regulate the electoral process.
The commission contended that the preparation of an election timetable forms an integral part of the electoral process entrusted to it by law.
According to INEC, the Young Party lacked sufficient legal standing to challenge guidelines affecting all registered political parties, insisting that the suit had become merely academic.
“The general election of 2027 is a process and the timetable is part of the activities donated by law to the appellant,” the commission stated in its appeal.
INEC further argued that the lower court did not identify any specific provision of the timetable that directly contradicted the Electoral Act 2026.
The commission maintained that the timelines contained in its guidelines were within the permissible limits of the law and did not amount to an unlawful alteration of statutory deadlines.
It also faulted the trial court for concluding that its timetable “tactically altered” political activities allowed under the Electoral Act, describing the finding as speculative and unsupported by evidence.
INEC argued that it possesses the authority to issue regulations, guidelines and timetables necessary for the effective implementation of the Electoral Act and conduct of elections.
The legal dispute centres on the extent of INEC’s powers to regulate internal party processes ahead of elections, particularly the scheduling of party primaries and submission of candidate details.
Political parties are expected to conduct primaries and submit candidates’ particulars within timelines prescribed by law before general elections. INEC traditionally issues a comprehensive timetable years ahead of elections to coordinate party activities, voter registration, campaigns and other electoral processes.
The case is likely to have significant implications for preparations toward the 2027 general elections, especially regarding the balance between INEC’s regulatory powers and the statutory rights of political parties under the Electoral Act.
No date has been fixed for the hearing of the appeal.