Court voids INEC’s listing of NDC candidate, orders replacement

The Federal High Court in Lagos has ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to replace Ibrahim Lukman with Olumuyiwa Owadara as the Nigeria Democratic Congress candidate for Oshodi/Isolo Federal Constituency I in the 2027 general election, ruling that Lukman did not participate in the party’s primary.

In a judgment delivered on October 20, Justice Akintayo Aluko nullified INEC’s publication of Lukman as the party’s candidate, holding that the commission violated the Electoral Act 2026 by listing him despite monitoring the primary election at which Owadara emerged winner.

The court also awarded N1m in costs against INEC and Lukman.

Justice Aluko based his decision partly on INEC’s own monitoring report, which confirmed that Owadara scored the highest number of lawful votes cast at the May 29 primary.

The NDC also told the court that it conducted no other primary for the constituency and that Lukman did not participate in the exercise.

Despite this, INEC published Lukman’s name and particulars as the party’s candidate on August 1, leaving Owadara off the list.

2027: INEC to release revised candidates’ list after errors

Owadara had argued that he participated in the primary, won the exercise and completed the nomination forms submitted to INEC.

The commission maintained that it published the names uploaded to its platform by political parties, including the NDC. However, the judge rejected the explanation, saying it was not supported by credible evidence.

“The commission has no lawful basis or justification to publish the name and particulars of the 3rd Defendant as the candidate of the 2nd Defendant for the said election,” Aluko held.

The judge ruled that the publication violated Sections 29(1), 32(1) and 84(1) of the Electoral Act 2026, which regulate the submission of candidates emerging from party primaries and INEC’s monitoring of such exercises.

He also found no credible evidence that the NDC had initiated a lawful process to change its candidate under Section 33 of the Act or conducted another primary.

The court concluded that Owadara had established his case with credible evidence, adding that the primary was conducted in accordance with the party’s guidelines, constitution and the Electoral Act.

In reaching his decision, Aluko relied on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Igboke v. Chukwu (2023), which set aside INEC’s publication of a candidate who had not won the relevant party primary.

Lukman had challenged the court’s jurisdiction, arguing that he was not properly served with the originating summons because he was in London when service was purportedly effected. He also denied that the WhatsApp number and email address used belonged to him.

The judge dismissed the objection, noting that the court had authorised substituted service after a bailiff failed to serve Lukman personally.

The court found that the WhatsApp number used for service matched the number Lukman provided to INEC in his Form EC9, an affidavit of personal particulars sworn to on June 27.

It also considered WhatsApp exchanges between the lawyers to both parties, which it said showed that court processes were exchanged in August. Citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Saleh v. Abah, the judge held that service on a party’s counsel who did not deny receiving the processes was valid.

The judge further noted that Lukman filed no counter-affidavit or defence to challenge Owadara’s claims.

Owadara’s lawyer, Festus Ogun, said the judgment reaffirmed the judiciary’s role in upholding the law and protecting the integrity of party primaries.

He described the publication of a candidate who did not participate in the recognised primary as an injustice to the legitimate winner.

“We are happy the court agreed with us and ordered INEC to substitute the name for our client. This is a victory for democracy,” Ogun told The PUNCH.

The NDC, through its counsel, Ikechukwu Onodi, had argued that INEC lacked the power to substitute a validly nominated candidate, maintaining that candidate substitution was an internal party matter subject to statutory conditions.

INEC’s counsel, Segun Bello, also argued that determining whom a political party sponsors was not the commission’s responsibility and that it was required to remain neutral.

On October 23, Owadara’s legal team wrote to the INEC chairman, enclosing a certified true copy of the judgment and requesting immediate compliance with the court’s orders.