The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja on Thursday invalidated key provisions of the Electoral Act governing political party membership registers and candidate nomination processes, ruling that they are inconsistent with the 1999 Constitution.
The decision was reached unanimously by a three-member panel led by Justice Balkisu Aliyu, which upheld appeal CA/ABJ/CV/750/2026 filed by the Zenith Party and overturned the Federal High Court’s earlier judgment dismissing the suit.
Delivering the lead judgment, Justice Eberechi Nyesom-Wike declared Sections 77(5), 77(6), 77(7), and 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026 unconstitutional.
The appellate court ruled that the National Assembly cannot enact laws that limit constitutional powers already vested in political parties.
It held that Sections 221 and 222 of the Constitution recognise political parties as the bodies empowered to sponsor candidates for elections and oversee their internal affairs.
According to the court, where the Constitution has already outlined the qualifications and disqualifications for elective offices, the Electoral Act cannot create additional requirements that prevent otherwise qualified persons from taking part in party primaries.
The appeal followed the May 5, 2026, judgment of the Federal High Court in Abuja, delivered by Justice Mohammed Umar, which dismissed the Zenith Party’s challenge against the disputed provisions.
The party argued that the contested sections unlawfully encroached on the internal administration of political parties and restricted their constitutional authority to determine membership and nominate candidates.
Among the provisions struck down was Section 77(5), which required that only party members whose names appeared in the membership register submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission could vote or contest during party primaries, congresses, and conventions.
The court held that the provision unlawfully restricted the constitutional powers of political parties to regulate their own membership.
The appellate court also nullified Section 77(6), which barred political parties from using any membership register other than the one previously submitted to INEC, ruling that it gave the electoral commission excessive control over the internal affairs of political parties.
Section 77(7), which prevented political parties that failed to submit their membership registers within the stipulated period from fielding candidates in elections, was equally declared unconstitutional.
According to the court, such a penalty effectively denied political parties their constitutional right to sponsor candidates for elective positions.
Justice Nyesom-Wike also declared Section 84(2) unconstitutional, holding that restricting political parties to direct primaries or consensus as methods of candidate nomination amounted to undue legislative interference in their internal affairs.
The court noted that political parties should retain the constitutional discretion to determine their mode of selecting candidates in accordance with their constitutions.
However, the appellate court clarified that its judgment did not invalidate the entire Sections 77 and 84 of the Electoral Act.
It explained that the provisions requiring political parties to maintain membership registers and make them available to INEC remain valid, adding that only the specific subsections found to be inconsistent with the Constitution were struck down.
