The Supreme Court has upheld electoral provisions governing political party membership registers and candidate nomination, a development with potential consequences for disputed nominations ahead of Nigeria’s 2027 general elections.
The judgment, delivered on Thursday, September 24, 2026, allows an appeal by the Independent National Electoral Commission against an earlier Court of Appeal decision favouring the Zenith Labour Party.
A seven-member panel led by Justice Adamu Jauro set aside the appellate decision and upheld the trial court’s judgment. The apex court also awarded ₦2 million in costs against the ZLP. (tvcnews.tv)
The litigation concerned Sections 77(5), 77(6), 77(7) and 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026, covering membership registers and the methods political parties may use to nominate candidates.
The Federal High Court had dismissed the ZLP’s challenge on May 5, 2026. The party subsequently obtained a partly favourable Court of Appeal judgment on July 16, prompting INEC’s appeal to the Supreme Court. (pmnewsnigeria.com)
The statutory framework requires parties to submit membership registers to INEC at least 21 days before their primaries, congresses or conventions. It limits participation to registered members, prohibits the use of a different register and provides consequences for failure to submit the register within the prescribed period. Section 84(2) concerns nomination through direct primaries or consensus. (placng.org, tvcnews.tv)
In separate proceedings, the Supreme Court dismissed the Social Democratic Party’s appeal on its merits and struck out the Youth Party’s appeal because it was filed one day late. The reported decisions do not provide a list of individual candidates disqualified across these parties.
The potential relevance to Rivers APC governorship candidate Kingsley Ogundu Chinda lies in an existing dispute over when he became a member of the party and whether his name appeared in the register submitted to INEC.
Politics Nigeria reported on June 3 that the Association of Legislative Drafting and Advocacy Practitioners had challenged Chinda’s eligibility and requested access to the APC membership register. The association argued that the timing of his defection raised questions about his qualification to participate in the primary.
Chinda emerged from the APC governorship primary on May 21, while his defection was announced in the House of Representatives on June 2. However, his defection letter was dated April 23. The association’s argument that the later parliamentary announcement determined his eligibility remains a litigant’s position, rather than an established finding against him in the newly reported judgment.
This is the crucial evidential gap: the reports reviewed do not reproduce the relevant APC register or establish whether Chinda’s name was included in a properly submitted version.
Restoring the statutory rules could strengthen a challenge based on proven non-compliance. It does not, on the evidence currently available, establish that the Supreme Court has already examined Chinda’s records and ordered his exclusion.
Politically, the issue reaches into the prolonged struggle between Federal Capital Territory Minister Nyesom Wike and Governor Siminalayi Fubara.
Their fallout developed into a confrontation over political control, legislative authority and the operation of government in Rivers State. The crisis culminated in President Bola Tinubu’s declaration of emergency rule on March 18, 2025, and the suspension of the governor, his deputy and state lawmakers. Emergency rule ended six months later.
Yet the subsequent reconciliation must also be recognised. Fubara publicly endorsed Chinda and the Wike-backed Rainbow Coalition, urging his supporters to support its candidates.
Consequently, any eventual disqualification of Chinda would potentially unsettle a succession arrangement that both Wike and Fubara have publicly supported. It would not automatically amount to a political victory for Fubara or restore him as the APC candidate.
As political analysis, a successful challenge could weaken Wike’s control over the succession process, increase the bargaining power of rival party interests and test the reconciliation between former opponents. Those consequences remain conditional on an actual finding against the nomination.
The Supreme Court has restored rules that matter to the validity of party primaries and nominations. The further claim that Chinda and other named candidates have already been removed from the ballot remains unconfirmed without the judgment’s specific orders, a candidate-specific ruling or an applicable INEC decision.
