INEC reviews Supreme Court verdict as 2027 candidate eligibility faces fresh uncertainty

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has commenced a review of the Supreme Court judgment upholding key provisions of the Electoral Act 2026, amid growing uncertainty over the eligibility of some political candidates ahead of the 2027 general elections.

INEC Chairman, Professor Joash Amupitan, disclosed this on Tuesday at the commission’s World Press Conference in Abuja, saying the electoral body had received complaints from political parties, aggrieved aspirants and members of the National Assembly over the implications of the judgment.

The development follows the September 24, 2026 judgment of the Supreme Court in the case between INEC and the Zenith Labour Party (ZLP), in which the apex court affirmed the constitutionality of Sections 77(5), 77(6), 77(7) and 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026.

The judgment also upheld INEC’s revised timetable and schedule of activities for the 2027 elections.

Amupitan said the commission received the certified true copy of the judgment on Tuesday and was currently examining its provisions before deciding on the appropriate steps.

He said the complaints received by the commission had drawn attention to the possible implications of the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Electoral Act for candidates whose political parties and nomination processes may have been affected.

“We have recently received complaints from some political parties, and aggrieved aspirants, and even from the National Assembly, drawing our attention to the recent Supreme Court decision in INEC and Zenith Labour Party, delivered on the 24th day of September, 2026,” Amupitan said.

According to him, the apex court affirmed the constitutionality of Section 77, subsections 5 to 7, of the Electoral Act 2026 and upheld the commission’s revised timetable for the 2027 general election.

READ ALSO; INEC meeting: Defections raise fresh questions over 2027 candidacies

“We only received the certified true copy of this judgment this morning, and it is being reviewed,” he added.

Candidates Under Fresh Scrutiny

The commission’s review has heightened attention around the political status of several high-profile candidates who changed political parties after their former parties had either conducted or commenced nomination exercises.

Among those whose candidacies have attracted scrutiny are Rivers State governorship candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Kingsley Chinda; Delta Central senatorial candidate of the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC), Ovie Omo-Agege; former Cross River State governor and Peoples Redemption Party (PRP) presidential candidate, Donald Duke; and former Delta State House of Assembly Speaker, Victor Ochei.

The controversy centres on whether candidates who defected or moved to new political platforms after nomination exercises had commenced or been concluded can validly emerge as candidates under the provisions of the Electoral Act and the Supreme Court’s latest interpretation.

For INEC, the issue is particularly sensitive because the commission is already operating within a fixed electoral timetable.

The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the relevant provisions of the Electoral Act and INEC’s revised schedule could have implications for how parties conduct nominations and how the commission treats candidates whose political circumstances changed after their former parties had completed or commenced nomination processes.

INEC Treads Carefully

The commission’s decision to study the certified judgment before making a pronouncement suggests that it is seeking to avoid taking action that could conflict with the interpretation of the apex court.

The complaints from political parties and aspirants could also lead to further clarification on the application of the disputed provisions as the 2027 election approaches.

With political parties already positioning themselves for the elections, any decision by INEC on the eligibility of prominent candidates could have significant consequences for the affected parties and constituencies.

The commission is therefore expected to examine the judgment alongside the Electoral Act, its existing timetable and relevant constitutional provisions before determining whether any adjustment or clarification is required.

For now, INEC has stopped short of declaring any of the affected candidates ineligible.

Instead, the commission has made clear that the Supreme Court judgment is under active review, with the outcome expected to provide greater clarity on the legal status of candidates caught up in the dispute.

The development adds another layer of legal and political uncertainty to preparations for the 2027 general elections, with parties, aspirants and voters now awaiting INEC’s interpretation of the apex court’s ruling.