By Nchetachi Chukwuajah
A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to amend the 2027 election timetable and schedule of events to align with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026.
Trial judge, Justice James Omotosho, delivered the judgement on Tuesday, May 26, in a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/720/2026, filed by the Social Democratic Party (SDP) with INEC as the sole defendant.
Justice Omotosho also held that INEC has the power to issue a timetable for elections and change it as it deems necessary, according to Section 151 of the Electoral Act, 2026, adding that such subsidiary legislation must not be at variance with the principal act.
He noted that the 2027 election timetable issued by INEC, which stated the timeframe within which political parties are to hold their primaries and the timeframe for the submission of membership registers of political parties, is valid and legally issued by the electoral body.
The judge said, “Election timetable is a chain of events or actions, starting from the timeframe for the submission of membership register of political parties to be used for the purpose of the primaries and the election, timeframe for primaries, and eventually gets to the real voting.
“Election timetable is not only the date for voting, but preparatory steps, which are conditional to valid election, and nominations must be included in the election timetable.
“Election timetable, without date for submission of parties’ membership register, timeframe for primaries, etc., is inchoate. Without this timetable, there would be chaos in our electoral system.
“This court is therefore convinced that the defendant is empowered by the Electoral Act to issue timetables for elections.
“To further buttress this, the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, which is the grundnorm of all laws in Nigeria, alluded to this under Section 285(14) of the Constitution (as amended).”
Justice Omotosho further noted that under Section 31 of the Electoral Act, 2026, political parties are at liberty to substitute and withdraw nominated candidates alongside an affidavit to the commission not later than 90 days before the election.
He held that the August 22 and September 29, 2026, deadline issued by INEC in its revised timetable for political parties to submit the names of their presidential and national Assembly elections and governorship and House of Assembly elections, respectively, contradicts the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026.
“From the above, political parties are by law allowed the liberty to submit the withdrawal and sworn affidavit to the defendant not later than 90 days to the election.
“The defendant in the revised timetable, however, stipulated the 22nd of August, 2026, and 19th September, 2026, as the date for candidates for presidential and National Assembly elections and governorship and House of Assembly.
“These dates are far larger than the 90 days allowed by the Electoral Act, 2026. This means that the timetable has reduced the timeframe for parties to submit withdrawal to the defendant,” the judge stated.
According to Justice Omotosho, INEC acted beyond its powers by abridging the time for political parties to submit the names of their candidates for the 2027 general elections in its revised timetable and schedule of events.
He said, “The defendant therefore acted ultra vires its powers by reducing the time allowed by political parties to convey withdrawals and sworn affidavits to the defendant contrary to the 90 days stipulated by the Electoral Act, 2026.
“In the final analysis, the defendant is empowered by law to issue timetable for elections, but it must do so in compliance with the time frames in the Electoral Act 2026.
“Therefore, the claims of the plaintiff (SDP) succeed in part.”
Justice Omotosho also held that the suit was not statute-barred, contrary to INEC’s submission, as the March 27 press statement originated the action, having been filed on April 9.
He said, “This honourable court hereby declares that the defendant is also empowered to alter the timetable for the ultimate aim of giving effect to the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), and the Electoral Act.
“This honourable court hereby declared that the defendant cannot lawfully abridge or vary the 90-day period for substitution of candidates under Section 31 of the Electoral Act, 2026.
“This honourable court hereby declares that the defendant cannot abridge the time stipulated in Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026, given to political parties to submit the names of their candidates at least 120 days to the date of election.
“This honourable court hereby declares that the defendant is hereby ordered to amend the Election Timetable 2027 and Schedule of Activities in compliance with Sections 29 (1) & 31 of the Electoral Act, 2026.
”This honourable court hereby declares that the defendant requesting for membership register of political parties and giving a timeframe within which to conduct primaries is not ultra vires the powers of the defendant.
“This honourable court hereby declares that the deadline of 29th August, 2026, and 16th September, 2026, fixed for political parties to submit nomination forms for candidates for Presidential and National Assembly elections, as well as Governorship and House of Assembly elections, is void to the extent of its inconsistencies with the clear provisions of Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act 2026.”
In the originating summons filed by the SDP on April 9, the party asked the court to determine five questions, one of which was “whether having regard to Sections 82 and 84(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026, the defendant’s powers to receive notices, attend, observe, and monitor party primaries extend to fixing or prescribing the timetable within which political parties must conduct their primaries.”
Recall that on May 20, Justice Mohammed Umar of a Federal High Court in Abuja similarly nullified the timelines of INEC for the conduct of party primaries and the nomination of candidates.
The court, delivering judgement in a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/517/2016 and filed by the Youth Party (YP) on March 11, held that the electoral commission lacks the statutory powers to abridge timelines provided under the Electoral Act, 2026.
INEC has, however, appealed the judgement and filed a notice of appeal and a motion for a stay of execution of the judgement of the lower court.
