Chinedum Anayo | 9News Nigeria Politics
The Supreme Court’s latest interpretation of the Electoral Act 2026 has ignited questions over the eligibility of some politicians preparing to contest the 2027 general elections.
Such new developments borders particularly around those who recently changed political parties or were involved in multiple nomination processes.
The judgment, delivered on Thursday, September 24, 2026, restored key provisions of the Electoral Act dealing with political-party membership registers and participation in party primaries.
The decision overturned an earlier judgment of the Court of Appeal which had invalidated the provisions.
One of the major issues arising from the judgment concerns the requirement for political parties to maintain and submit membership registers in accordance with the relevant law.
The provisions also have implications for politicians seeking party tickets where their membership status does not meet the statutory requirements.
In practical terms, the membership records of candidates could become important in determining whether they were eligible to participate in their party’s nomination process.
The issue is particularly significant for politicians who recently defected from one political party to another.
The fact that a politician announced a defection or joined another party does not, on its own, establish whether the person satisfied all the legal requirements to participate in that party’s primary.
The relevant membership register, the date it was submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission, as well as the candidate’s participation in the nomination process could become critical if the nomination is challenged.
The ruling also has implications for politicians who participated in more than one party primary for the same election.
The restored provisions impose restrictions on such multiple participation, meaning that a candidate who actually took part in more than one party’s primary could face an eligibility challenge.
However, participation in a primary should not be confused with merely joining or leaving a political party.
Whether an individual participated in more than one primary would depend on the facts and documentary evidence in each case.
The judgment therefore does not mean that every politician who has defected, joined a new party after a particular date or faced questions over their nomination has automatically been disqualified.
Instead, the effect of the ruling will depend on whether the individual candidate complied with the relevant provisions of the Electoral Act and whether any alleged breach is established through the appropriate legal process.
The development also follows ongoing litigation involving some of the 2027 aspirants.
In Gombe State, for instance, a Federal High Court recently nullified the Peoples Democratic Party governorship primary that produced Professor Isa Ali Pantami and ordered a fresh primary.
The PDP subsequently announced a new primary process.
That case is separate from the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Electoral Act and should not automatically be attributed to the Supreme Court judgment.
Significantly, for voters, political parties and prospective candidates, the latest ruling means that questions surrounding party membership, membership registers and primary participation could become increasingly important as the 2027 elections approach.
Ultimately, a candidate’s party membership records, primary-election documents, INEC filings and any relevant court orders would have to be examined individually before a conclusion can be reached.
