“INEC Cannot Take Steps, Retrace Its Steps And Benefit From Such Action” — Court Rules

BY TAIBAT UMMI YAKUBU

A political association seeking a place on Nigeria’s 2027 ballot has suffered a major setback after a Federal High Court in Abuja refused to compel the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to register it as a political party, despite faulting the electoral body’s argument over the timing of its application.

Justice James Omotosho ruled that although INEC could not rely on its revised election timetable to invalidate the association’s case, the All Allies Alliance (AAA) had failed to satisfy the legal requirements for registration.

The judgment exposes a difficult reality for emerging political groups: challenging the electoral umpire’s decisions may not be enough to secure a place on the ballot if the association cannot demonstrate that it has fulfilled the conditions laid down by law.

The case was instituted by Jyde Adelakun, an aggrieved member of the association, who approached the court after INEC declined to register AAA for participation in the 2027 general elections.

Among other demands, Adelakun asked the court to declare that the association should be deemed registered under Section 75(4) of the Electoral Act 2022 because INEC allegedly failed to notify it in writing of any deficiencies within the statutory 90-day period, which he said expired on May 21, 2026.

He also sought an order compelling INEC to register or recognise AAA as a political party and include it among parties eligible to contest the 2027 elections. In addition, he requested a perpetual injunction against any action that could prevent the association from participating in the electoral process, alongside ₦50 million in damages over the alleged violation of the rights of its members.

INEC, however, maintained that the association was not entitled to registration or deemed registration because it had failed to meet essential requirements. Among the shortcomings identified by the commission were the absence of an Abuja address as required under Section 222 of the Constitution and the lack of a Protem Secretary.

In resolving the dispute, Justice Omotosho considered whether the Electoral Act 2026 had invalidated the case and whether Adelakun was entitled to the reliefs he sought.

Advertisement

On the first question, the judge rejected INEC’s argument that the new electoral law rendered the suit invalid, holding that the applicable law was the Electoral Act 2022, under which the cause of action arose.

The court also faulted the commission’s reliance on its revised election timetable. Justice Omotosho noted that the association had submitted its application before INEC announced the election timetable and subsequently revised the dates of the presidential and National Assembly elections.

According to the judge, INEC could not change its timetable after the application had been submitted and then use that change to disadvantage the applicant.

“The defendant cannot take steps, retrace its steps and then expect to benefit from such action to the detriment of another,” the judge held.

That finding, however, did not translate into victory for AAA.

On the central question of registration, the court concluded that the association had failed to establish that it met the necessary conditions. Justice Omotosho observed that the letter submitted to INEC did not convincingly qualify as a formal declaration of intent to register a political party, appearing instead to be a request for the commission’s registration guidelines.

The judge further stated that even if the letter were treated as a declaration of intent, it still fell short of the applicable guidelines.

The outcome leaves the association without the court order it sought to secure recognition ahead of the 2027 elections. It also demonstrates that while INEC’s administrative decisions remain open to judicial scrutiny, a successful challenge requires more than identifying weaknesses in the commission’s arguments.

For AAA, the court’s criticism of INEC’s handling of the election timetable was not enough to overcome the deficiencies in its registration application. The association’s attempt to obtain recognition through litigation therefore failed, with the requirements for registration remaining the decisive issue in the case.