Judge dismisses INEC’s preliminary objection, declares exclusion unconstitutional
• Court says electoral body breached PDP candidate’s right to fair hearing
• Rules INEC cannot remove a validly nominated candidate without a court order
• Commission warned against declaring governorship election result without plaintiffs’ participation
Daud Olatunji
The Federal High Court has ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to restore the name of the Peoples Democratic Party’s governorship candidate in Ogun State, Ladi Adebutu, to its list of candidates for the 2027 governorship election within 24 hours.
The court, in a judgment delivered on Friday by Justice Peter Lifu, held that INEC lacked the constitutional and statutory powers to unilaterally disqualify a candidate validly nominated by a political party.
It consequently declared the exclusion of Adebutu’s name from the commission’s provisional list unlawful, unconstitutional and of no effect, directing INEC to immediately rectify the list published on October 10, 2026, to reflect his name.
The judgment followed a suit instituted by the PDP and Adebutu, challenging the commission’s decision to omit the former lawmaker’s name despite his emergence from the party’s governorship primary.
Justice Lifu also dismissed INEC’s preliminary objection seeking the termination of the suit, resolving the issues raised in the substantive case in favour of the plaintiffs.
In dismissing the objection, the judge said the originating summons filed by the plaintiffs was competent, noting that it was signed by a senior counsel whose name appeared on the court processes.
“I have carefully assessed the originating summons and I see that it bears the name of the senior counsel and was signed by him. It also has the names of other counsels in the law firm,” the judge said.
The court subsequently proceeded to determine the substantive issues, including whether INEC breached Adebutu’s right to fair hearing and whether the commission possessed the authority to remove his name after his nomination by the PDP.
While reviewing the evidence, the judge noted that Adebutu had previously contested the Ogun governorship election in 2019 and emerged as the PDP candidate in the 2023 election before participating in the party’s primary for the 2027 poll.
He said the plaintiffs maintained that the party conducted its primary on May 24, 2026, and subsequently published Adebutu’s name as its governorship candidate on August 29, without any legal challenge to his emergence.
The court heard that the PDP later discovered that Adebutu’s name was missing when INEC published its provisional list of candidates in October.
The plaintiffs also told the court that the party’s national leadership had written to INEC on October 14, requesting the restoration of Adebutu’s name, but the commission allegedly failed to act on the request.
On the question of membership registration, the judge examined the testimony of the PDP’s National Organising Secretary, Bature, who appeared as the first prosecution witness, and INEC’s programme analyst, Mustapha, who testified as the defence witness.
Bature told the court that he was responsible for the registration of new members and the management of the PDP membership register.
He maintained that the party submitted its membership register to INEC within the stipulated period through a flash drive containing the names of more than 30,000 registered members.
According to him, Adebutu’s name was included in the register submitted to the commission on April 22, 2026, with serial number 1536.
The witness also disputed the flash drive presented by INEC in court, insisting that it was not the same device submitted by the PDP.
“The PDP has proved beyond reasonable doubt that Hon. Ladi Adebutu is a registered member of the party in Ogun State,” the court held while reviewing the evidence on the membership register.
The judge questioned INEC’s position on the register, wondering whether the commission had assumed the responsibility of determining who belonged to a political party.
The court also faulted INEC for failing to establish that the flash drive tendered by the commission had not been altered or that it was the actual device submitted by the PDP.
However, INEC’s witness, Mustapha, told the court that he supervised the exercise involving the PDP membership register and that the party submitted both hard and soft copies of its membership list.
He claimed that a search conducted before the publication of the final candidates’ list showed that Adebutu’s name was missing, although the name of his deputy was included.
But under cross-examination, Mustapha admitted that he was not the officer who received the flash drive from the PDP and could therefore not personally confirm the contents of the device submitted by the party.
The admission became a significant point in the court’s assessment of the conflicting evidence.
Justice Lifu observed that INEC’s witness had initially maintained that Adebutu’s name was missing from the flash drive but later admitted that he did not personally receive the device.
The judge consequently questioned the reliability of the commission’s evidence, noting that the PDP’s account of the membership register remained unchallenged.
“The evidence of PW1 remains unchallenged and uncontroverted. PW1 said that the flash drive submitted was not the one INEC brought to court and that he only submitted a soft copy in a flash drive contrary to INEC’s claim,” the judge said.
He added that the failure of the commission to present a material witness who could establish what was actually submitted by the PDP weakened its case
INEC breached Adebutu’s right to fair hearing
On the allegation of breach of fair hearing, the court held that INEC violated Adebutu’s fundamental right by removing his name without giving him an opportunity to explain his position.
Justice Lifu stressed that no authority could withdraw a right already vested in an individual without observing the principles of fair hearing.
“When a right is vested in a person, such right cannot be taken away without hearing from the person,” he said.
The judge added, “Adebutu was not accorded the right to be heard before INEC took the decision. Therefore, the right to fair hearing of the plaintiff is breached.”
He described fair hearing as a fundamental principle of Nigeria’s jurisprudence, stressing that any judicial or administrative decision affecting an individual must comply with due process.
INEC Has No Power To Disqualify Candidate’
On whether INEC could independently disqualify Adebutu after the PDP had forwarded his name, the judge held that the power to nominate candidates belonged exclusively to political parties.
He explained that the commission’s responsibility to monitor party primaries did not confer on it the authority to substitute its judgment for that of a political party or remove a duly nominated candidate.
“I have taken a cursory look at the judgment of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court did not give INEC the power to start omitting or removing names of members from a party,” Justice Lifu said.
He added, “INEC does not have the power to remove names or disqualify any candidate on its own. The power to disqualify a candidate after the name has been forwarded resides with the Federal High Court or State High Court.”
The judge further stated, “The commission lacks the power to disqualify any candidate. Even if INEC believes that the name of a candidate was omitted, the commission must approach the court that has the power to remove the name.”
Emphasising the exclusive role of political parties in choosing their candidates, he said, “The power to nominate a candidate for an election exclusively belongs to a political party, and the exercise of that power is within a party.”
He added, “A court has no power to nominate a candidate. That has been the position of the law. The effect of the above is that no authority can nominate a candidate or remove it.”
The court also considered the PDP’s May 24 primary election, which INEC was said to have monitored, and found that the evidence before it did not establish that the exercise was defective.
Justice Lifu held that Adebutu was validly nominated by the party and that the commission had not raised any objection to his emergence at the appropriate time.
Judge Faults INEC’s Delay
The court further faulted INEC for waiting several months after the primary election before excluding Adebutu’s name from the candidates’ list.
Justice Lifu observed that the nomination and publication of candidates were pre-election matters which should be addressed within the time stipulated by law.
He noted that no person had approached the court within the prescribed period to challenge Adebutu’s emergence from the primary election.
“As far as I know, no person filed any suit to challenge Adebutu 14 days after the conduct of the poll. It was baffling that INEC waited until August,” he said.
The judge described the commission’s eventual decision to remove the PDP candidate as an afterthought, warning that allowing such an action could create uncertainty in the electoral process.
“This court has established that INEC lacks the power to disqualify any candidate,” he said.
“INEC should have approached the court to disqualify the candidate, but it waited until after four months to take the action. This, to me, is an afterthought.”
Issuing a further warning about the implications of allowing the commission to exercise such powers, Justice Lifu said, “If this is not resolved, there will be a day that INEC will disqualify a candidate a day to election. This must not be allowed. This would be an absurdity.”
He consequently resolved the issue in favour of the PDP and Adebutu.
Court Orders Restoration Within 24 Hours
The judge also considered Section 77(6) of the Electoral Act, which provides for the submission of political parties’ membership registers within the stipulated period before an election.
He held that the plaintiffs had established that Adebutu participated in the party’s primary and that his name was contained in the membership register submitted to INEC.
The court noted that the commission ought to have raised any concern about his participation during its monitoring of the primary election rather than subsequently removing his name.
After considering the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, Justice Lifu concluded that INEC acted beyond its statutory authority.
“Consequently, the case of the plaintiff succeeds and is meritorious. The defendant acted ultra vires,” he declared.
He added, “INEC has no power, either administratively or otherwise, to remove a name if a candidate was validly nominated by the owner
The judge further ruled that the removal of Adebutu’s name was “unlawful, unconstitutional and of no effect.”
The court therefore ordered INEC to immediately restore Adebutu’s name and publish the corrected candidates’ list within 24 hours, directing the commission to amend the list released on October 10, 2026.
In another consequential pronouncement, the court declared that INEC could not validly pronounce the result of the 2027 Ogun State governorship election without the participation of the plaintiffs, warning that any election conducted in disregard of the order would be unconstitutional and of no effect.
The judgment represents a major legal development in the unfolding dispute over the PDP’s governorship candidacy in Ogun State ahead of the 2027 general elections.
Do you want to share a story with us? Do you want to advertise with us? Do you need publicity for a product, service, or event? Contact us on WhatsApp +2348183319097 Email: platformtimes@gmail.com
We are committed to impactful investigative journalism for human interest and social justice. Your donation will help us tell more stories. Kindly donate any amount HERE
