NBA warns INEC chairman, vows to sanction lawyers involved in political parties domestic affairs

By Samuel Abasiekong-Abasiekong

The Nigeria Bar Association NBA has warned the Prof. Joash Ojo Amupitan led Independent National Electoral Commission INEC to maintain neutrality and not, under any circumstances, be perceived as a participant in political engineering or as an institution whose regulatory authority is deployed in a manner that weakens political pluralism.

The NBA warning triggered on Friday 10th April 10, 2026 came on the heels of the national chaos and viral protest arising from the derecognition of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) by INEC.

The NBA further vowed to recommend lawyers and judges for sanction to the National Judicial Council (NJC) for meddling into the domestic affairs of political parties which the Electoral Act 2026 clearly restrained them.

The NBA warning is contained in a Press Statement signed by the association National President, Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN and posted on his official Facebook page.

In its statement, the Bar Association said any lawyer filing interim and/or interlocutory injunctions in clear contempt of statutory provisions of the law shall be dealt with as section 83 of the Electoral Act 2026 says: “No court in Nigeria shall entertain jurisdiction over any suit or matter pertaining to the internal affairs of a political party.”

To properly educate our readership, 9newng.com went extra mile to upload the whole content of Section 83 of the Electoral Act 2026 which some mischievous lawyers interprete to serve their gains. Below is the whole content of Section 83 of the Electoral Act 2026:

[“(1) The Commission shall keep records of the activities of all the registered political parties.
(2) The Commission may seek information or clarification from any registered political party in connection with any activity of the political party which may be contrary to the provisions of the Constitution or any other law, guidelines, rules or regulations made under an Act of the National Assembly.
(3) The Commission may direct its enquiry under subsection (2) to the Chairman or Secretary of the political party at the national, state, local government or area council or ward level, as the case may be.
(4) A political party which fails to provide the required information or clarification under subsection (2) or carry out any lawful directive given by the Commission in conformity with the provisions of this section is liable to a fine not more than N 1,000,000.
(5) Subject to the provision of subsection (3), no Court in Nigeria shall entertain jurisdiction over any suit or matter pertaining to the internal affairs of a political party.
(6) Where such action is brought in negation of this provision –
(a) no interim or interlocutory injunction shall be entertained by the Court, but the Court shall suspend its ruling and deliver it at the stage of final judgment and shall give accelerated hearing to the matter.
(b) the Court shall, at the conclusion of the matter, impose costs of not less than ₦10,000,000.00 on the counsel who filed the action and not less than ₦10,000,000.00 on the Plaintiff/Applicant and in addition to payment to the Commission of any cost, including solicitors’ fees incurred by it where joined as a party.”]

The NBA warning which is timeline and has come and the moment where Nigeria is preparing for 2027 general election reads in part:

“Not only are courts denied jurisdiction to entertain any matter pertaining to the internal affairs of a political party, but they are also precluded from granting any interim or interlocutory injunction even where any action has been brought in violation of the Act. The section further provides that “Where such an action is brought in negation of this provision, no interim or interlocutory injunction shall be entertained by the Court, but the Court shall suspend its ruling and deliver it at the stage of final judgment and shall give accelerated hearing to the matter”.

What we now see are situations where actions are not only instituted in Courts by lawyers in clear violation of the Act, but Courts purportedly grant interim and/or interlocutory injunctions in clear contempt of statutory provisions of the law. This does not augur well for our democracy. Democracy will not thrive in a situation where lawyers and courts take actions and decisions that not only negate our laws but also do violence to them. This emerging trend of subverting the clear letters of the Electoral Act and dragging courts into the internal affairs of political parties through disingenuous litigation, forum shopping, and malafide applications designed to secure undemocratic political advantage, bodes no good for our democracy. Such practices, if not immediately curbed, would directly contradict the clear intendment of the Electoral Act and risk transforming the judicial processes into avenues for political score-settling or electoral manipulation”