The 2027 general elections may witness a fresh wave of legal battles over political party membership, primaries and the eligibility of candidates following a landmark judgment by the Supreme Court restoring key provisions of the Electoral Act 2026.
The seven-member panel of the Supreme Court, in a unanimous judgment delivered on Thursday, September 24, 2026, restored Sections 77(5), 77(6), 77(7) and 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026.
The provisions had earlier been voided by the Court of Appeal following a legal challenge brought by the Zenith Labour Party (ZLP).
The Supreme Court, however, held that the disputed provisions were not inconsistent with the 1999 Constitution and set aside the Court of Appeal’s decision.
What the ruling means
The judgment brings political party membership registers and the process of selecting candidates back into sharp focus ahead of the 2027 elections.
Under Section 77(5), only party members whose names appear on the membership register submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) at least 21 days before a party’s primaries, congresses or conventions are eligible to participate in those activities.
Section 77(6) prevents parties from using a different membership register for the relevant exercise, while Section 77(7) provides consequences for a political party that fails to submit its membership register within the prescribed period.
Section 84(2) also provides for the nomination of candidates through direct primaries or consensus.
PDP candidates face fresh scrutiny
For the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the ruling could create another avenue for aspirants and other interested parties to challenge nominations where they can establish that the applicable membership-register or nomination requirements were not followed.
Vanguard reported that the judgment has already opened a fresh legal front involving some PDP and opposition candidates ahead of 2027.
However, the judgment does not automatically disqualify PDP candidates.
Any challenge would still have to be brought in accordance with the law and would depend on the facts and documentary evidence surrounding the particular candidate, party register and primary election.
Defectors could attract attention
The restored provisions could also become relevant in cases involving politicians who moved from one political party to another before seeking tickets.
Questions could arise over the date of membership, whether the person’s name appeared on the relevant register submitted to INEC, and whether the party’s nomination process complied with the Electoral Act.
Legal commentators have, however, differed on how the judgment should apply to steps already taken before the Supreme Court restored the provisions, particularly regarding questions of retrospectivity.
Not only PDP
The implications extend beyond the PDP.
Reports indicate that candidates and nomination processes involving the Social Democratic Party (SDP), Allied Peoples Movement (APM), People’s Redemption Party (PRP) and even an APC candidate could face legal scrutiny where specific complaints are brought concerning membership registers or nomination procedures.
The Supreme Court ruling itself, however, should not be interpreted as declaring all such candidates ineligible.
Why the ruling matters ahead of 2027
The major significance of the judgment is that political parties now have to pay closer attention to the statutory requirements governing their membership registers and candidate-selection processes.
This could potentially trigger a new round of litigation by unsuccessful aspirants who believe that a party’s register, primary or nomination process did not comply with the Electoral Act.
The ruling therefore places greater importance on questions such as:
- When did a candidate become a member of the party?
- Was the candidate’s name contained in the membership register submitted to INEC?
- Was the register submitted within the legally prescribed period?
- Was the same register used during the relevant party exercise?
- Was the candidate selected through a procedure permitted by the Electoral Act?
- Were any waivers or other internal party arrangements legally effective?
What happens next?
With the 2027 elections approaching, political parties are likely to face increased scrutiny of their nomination documents and internal electoral processes.
For the PDP and other opposition parties, the immediate issue is therefore not that the Supreme Court has cancelled their candidates, but that the legal framework governing party membership and nominations has been restored, creating additional grounds on which individual nominations could be challenged.
The ultimate fate of any particular candidate would have to be determined on the facts of the individual case and through the appropriate legal process.
The Supreme Court’s September 24 judgment has consequently added another potentially significant legal dimension to the preparations for the 2027 general elections.