The Supreme Court has upheld provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 requiring political parties to submit digital membership registers to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) ahead of their primaries.
In a judgment delivered on Thursday, September 24, 2026, in Abuja, a seven-member panel led by Justice Emmanuel Agim also restored the requirement that political parties nominate candidates through direct primaries or consensus.
The court set aside the July 16 judgment of the Court of Appeal which had declared Sections 77(5), (6), (7) and 84(2) of the Electoral Act unconstitutional.
The apex court also restored INEC’s revised timetable for the 2027 general elections and ordered Zenith Labour Party, which instituted the suit, to pay ₦2 million in costs to INEC.
Justice Agim, who delivered the lead judgment in the appeal marked SC/CV/495/2026, held that Section 77 of the Electoral Act did not personally disqualify individual members of a political party from contesting elections.
He said the provision instead prevents a political party that fails to submit its membership register within the stipulated period from fielding candidates.
The Court of Appeal had ruled that the provisions introduced additional qualifications and disqualifications not contained in the 1999 Constitution.
But the Supreme Court rejected that interpretation, drawing a distinction between the personal qualification of an individual candidate and the eligibility of a political party to field candidates.
According to the judgment, Section 77(7) “does not in any way disqualify the individual member of a political party personally from being a candidate in an election.”
The court held that the practical effect of the provision was to prevent a political party from presenting its members as candidates because of the party’s failure to submit its digital register to INEC.
Justice Agim further held that the requirements were designed to promote internal democracy and transparency in the conduct of party primaries, congresses and conventions.
He relied on Section 228 of the Constitution, which empowers the National Assembly to make laws providing guidelines and rules for internal democracy within political parties and to confer powers on INEC to ensure compliance.
The Supreme Court consequently held that Sections 77(5), (6) and (7) of the Electoral Act 2026 were valid.
The court also reversed the Court of Appeal’s decision striking down Section 84(2), which provides that political parties shall nominate candidates through direct primaries or consensus.
The appellate court had held that the provision interfered with the internal affairs and constitutions of political parties.
However, the Supreme Court ruled that the National Assembly was constitutionally empowered to regulate the conduct of party primaries.
Justice Agim noted that the law could only be invalidated if it was shown that it undermined internal democracy or fair and transparent party primaries.
The judge also pointed to Zenith Labour Party’s own constitution, which provides that its provisions are subject to the 1999 Constitution and the Electoral Act.
The apex court therefore held that the party could not rely on its internal constitution to avoid the overriding provisions of the Electoral Act.
On INEC’s revised timetable, the Supreme Court held that there was no evidence that Activity Serial Number Two violated Section 77(4) of the Electoral Act.
The court noted that INEC had initially provided a timeline from April 21, 2026, and subsequently extended it from April 23 to May 30, 2026, for the submission of digital membership registers.
It consequently restored the trial court’s May 5, 2026 judgment dismissing Zenith Labour Party’s suit.
The Supreme Court also rejected INEC’s argument that the National Assembly ought to have been joined as a party in the original suit.
Justice Agim held that the National Assembly did not have to be joined in every case challenging the constitutionality of an Act it enacted, unless its presence was necessary for the effective and complete determination of the dispute.
The court said the suit could be determined between INEC and the political party because the challenge concerned INEC’s actions, directives and regulations made pursuant to the Electoral Act.
In its final decision, the Supreme Court allowed INEC’s appeal on issues two, three, four and five, set aside the Court of Appeal judgment and restored the Federal High Court decision dismissing Zenith Labour Party’s suit.
The judgment effectively leaves the challenged Electoral Act provisions and INEC’s revised timetable for the 2027 general elections in force.
