By Opeyemi Adelakun
The Court of Appeal in Abuja has curtailed the extent to which electoral law can regulate the internal affairs of political parties, declaring four provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 unconstitutional.
The appellate court ruled that the National Assembly could not impose statutory restrictions that undermine powers already guaranteed to political parties under the 1999 Constitution.
The judgment followed an appeal by the Zenith Party against a Federal High Court decision dismissing its challenge to provisions of the new electoral law.
A three-member panel led by Justice Balkisu Aliyu unanimously allowed the appeal, with Justice Eberechi Nyesom-Wike delivering the lead judgment in the case marked CA/ABJ/CV/750/2026.
The court invalidated Sections 77(5), 77(6), 77(7) and 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026.
At the centre of the dispute was the extent of INEC’s involvement in political party membership records and the rules governing candidate selection.
The court held that Sections 221 and 222 of the Constitution recognise political parties as organisations responsible for sponsoring candidates and managing their internal affairs.
It therefore rejected provisions of the Electoral Act that, in its view, placed additional restrictions on those constitutional powers.
One of the affected provisions, Section 77(5), limited participation in party primaries, congresses and conventions to members whose names appeared on the membership register submitted to INEC.
The court also struck down Section 77(6), which prevented parties from using a membership register other than the one previously submitted to the electoral commission.
Section 77(7), which could prevent a party from fielding candidates where it failed to submit its membership register within the stipulated period, was equally declared unconstitutional.
The appellate court held that such restrictions could interfere with a political party’s constitutional right to sponsor candidates.
The court also nullified Section 84(2), which prescribed direct primaries or consensus as the methods through which political parties could nominate candidates.
According to the court, determining how candidates should emerge is essentially an internal matter for political parties, provided the process complies with their constitutions and applicable constitutional requirements.
The judgment further established that an individual who is qualified under the Constitution should not be disqualified through an additional condition imposed by subsidiary legislation.
However, the court did not invalidate the entire provisions of Sections 77 and 84.
It clarified that political parties are still required to maintain membership registers and make them available to INEC. The specific restrictions found to conflict with the Constitution were the portions struck down.
The ruling is coming ahead of the 2027 general elections, when political parties will begin or intensify preparations for membership management, congresses and candidate selection.
The decision could therefore have significant implications for the relationship between political parties and INEC as preparations for the elections gather pace.
The judgment also comes amid another Court of Appeal decision concerning INEC’s timetable for the 2027 elections.
In a separate case, another appellate panel overturned a Federal High Court decision that had invalidated INEC’s timetable and guidelines for party primaries and the nomination of candidates.
Leave a Reply