Lawyers have warned politicians to always play by the rules of the game, accusing them of scheming to subvert the electoral process.
According to them, politicians cannot go against what the law prescribes and expect to get favourable results.
On September 24, the Supreme Court upheld the electoral guidelines put in place by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) for political parties in the country contesting the 2027 general election.
The apex court upheld the appeal filed by INEC against the Court of Appeal judgment voiding parts of the provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 dealing with political party primaries and membership registers.
INEC filed an appeal against parts of the Court of Appeal judgment, which voided provisions of the Electoral Act, in a suit commenced by the Zenith Labour Party (ZLP) at the High Court.
After hearing the appeal filed by INEC through its counsel, Dr Alex Izinyon, SAN, Justice Adamu Jauro entered judgment in favour of the electoral umpire and set aside the Court of Appeal judgment, which had been in favour of the Zenith Labour Party.
The apex court upheld the judgment of the trial court and also awarded N2 million in costs against the respondent, ZLP.
The original suit, marked FHC/ABJ/509/2026, was filed by the ZLP against the disputed provisions of the Electoral Act 2026.
The provisions at the centre of the dispute include 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 and amounted to unconstitutional interference in the internal affairs of political parties.
The party’s case was anchored, among others, on Sections 221 and 222 of the Constitution, which provide the constitutional framework governing political parties.
After the Federal High Court dismissed the suit, the ZLP appealed, leading to the Court of Appeal’s July 16 judgment.
INEC, dissatisfied with that judgment, subsequently lodged the present appeal before the Supreme Court.
A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Mr Abdul Balogun, said politicians cannot attempt to subvert the electoral process and expect a positive outcome.
“In a political process, you can’t attempt to subvert the process and get a positive result. The law must always catch up with you,” he said.
He said the disputed Sections 77 and 84 of the Electoral Act 2026 (as amended) govern political party membership registers and the statutory procedures for nominating candidates for elections, as well as their constitutional validity.
Section 77(5) mandates that voters and candidates must be listed in a membership register submitted to INEC at least 21 days before the primaries.
Section 77(6) prescribes disqualification for parties from fielding candidates if they fail to meet the submission deadline.
He criticised political parties for failing to do the right thing and wasting the time of the courts.
He said, “Some of the political parties know what is right but will deliberately fail to do it. The Electoral Act 2026 has no ambiguity, yet some persons will find one and approach the court to test the waters.
“In fact, some of these people know that the cases they file in court will not go anywhere, yet they will approach the court and waste the time of everybody.
“I am not saying it is not within their rights to approach a law court to seek redress, but I feel there are cases one should not waste his time on.”
A professor of law, Ajida Bello, urged strict compliance with electoral laws and the Supreme Court judgment.
According to the law professor, INEC should comply with the Supreme Court judgment and apply it where necessary.
“If politicians and political parties refuse to abide by the provisions of the law, they must learn the hard way. You cannot pick and choose which law to obey during the electoral process. The law must be fully complied with. INEC must implement the judgment of the Supreme Court where necessary,” he said.
Constitutional lawyer, Barrister Ume Ukpo, said the law is no respecter of anyone and that the interpretation of the relevant sections of the electoral law is clear enough for everyone to understand.
He said applying what the law says to the pronouncement of the Supreme Court simply means that some candidates of political parties are no longer eligible to contest elections because their parties have failed to do what they are required to do under the law.
“With the judgment of the Supreme Court, it is automatic disqualification for some candidates because their parties failed to live up to expectations.
“You cannot fail to do what you are supposed to do and expect positive results. The law must always catch up with you,” he said.
