By Julian Osamoto
The fate of some candidates in the 2027 elections could hinge on whether their names appeared on the membership registers political parties submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
INEC National Commissioner for Information and Voter Education, Mohammed Haruna, says parties that nominated candidates whose names were absent from the submitted registers may not be allowed to field them.
The position follows the Supreme Court’s September 24, 2026 judgment, which restored Sections 77(5), 77(6), 77(7) and 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026 after the Court of Appeal had declared the provisions unconstitutional.
The restored provisions place greater emphasis on the membership registers parties submit to INEC before primaries, with Section 77(5) limiting participation in party primaries to members whose names appear on the submitted register.
Section 77(6) bars parties from using a different register, while Section 77(7) prevents a party that fails to submit its register from fielding candidates.
Speaking on a television programe, Haruna said INEC would not allow parties to circumvent the provisions by substituting candidates whose nominations resulted from non-compliance.
“It’s like you committed an offence. And then, you come and benefit from it,” he said, citing previous disputes involving candidates in Zamfara and Plateau.
The implication could be significant for parties preparing their final candidate lists. Haruna said some parties could find themselves without candidates for certain positions if INEC determines that their nominees were not members of the parties when they contested their primaries.
“All the candidates, all the way to the Houses of Assembly, we interviewed them. If their names are not on the party register, they were not members of the party at the time that they contested for those tickets,” he said.
However, INEC has not yet issued its final position on how the Supreme Court judgment will affect individual candidates. The commission received the certified true copy of the judgment on October 7 and is reviewing its legal implications.
Haruna said INEC needed legal advice before making a definitive pronouncement, stressing that the commission must rely on an authenticated court document before taking action.
The uncertainty is already significant because the Supreme Court ruling came after parties had progressed with their preparations for the 2027 elections. The ruling therefore places greater pressure on parties to establish that their primaries complied with the membership-register requirements.
The issue also raises a broader question about candidate substitution. If INEC determines that a party violated the register provisions in selecting a candidate, Haruna’s position is that the party should not be allowed to cure the violation simply by replacing that candidate.
Beyond the legal dispute, Haruna expressed concern about threats and hostile rhetoric emerging from political campaigns ahead of the elections.
He said threats against political opponents should concern all stakeholders, including the ruling party, because they could undermine confidence in the electoral process.
INEC is also working to secure the funds required for the 2027 elections, with Haruna stressing that the commission no longer has sufficient time for delays as preparations intensify.
