The court of appeal in Abuja has voided sections 77(5), (6), (7), and 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026 for being inconsistent with certain provisions of the 1999 Constitution.
In a unanimous decision on Thursday, the court ruled that a
subsidiary law cannot disqualify an individual already deemed qualified by the
constitution.
The panel was led by Justice Balkisu Bello Aliyu, while the
lead judgment was delivered by Justice Eberechi Nyesom-Wike.
The appellate court held that sections 177 and 182 of the
1999 Constitution already listed the qualifying and disqualifying conditions
for political parties and candidates in an election.
The appellate court ruled that the national assembly cannot
impose restrictions on the powers of political parties already guaranteed by
the constitution.
The court held that section 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026
is unconstitutional since the provision seeks to limit political parties to
direct primaries or consensus mode.
The court held that the section amounts to undue legislative
interference in the internal affairs of political parties.
The court of appeal also held that the entire sections 77
and 84 of the Electoral Act were not voided, adding that provisions requiring
parties to maintain membership registers are still valid.
THE AFFECTED SECTIONS
The affected sections of the Electoral Act 2026 focus on
membership registers of political parties and the procedure for the nomination
of candidates.
Section 77(5) states that: “Only members whose names are
contained in the register shall be eligible to vote and be voted for in party
primaries, congresses and conventions.
“(6) A political party shall not use any other register for
party primaries, congresses and conventions except the register submitted to
the Commission.
“(7) A party that fails to submit the membership register
within the stipulated time shall not be eligible to field a candidate for that
election.”
Section 84 (2) states that: “The procedure for the
nomination of candidates by political parties for the various elective
positions shall be by direct primaries or consensus.”
THE CASE
The ZP had approached the court to appeal the dismissal of
its suit challenging the legality of some provisions of the Electoral Act 2026.
In May, Mohammed Umar, judge of the federal high court in
Abuja, dismissed ZP’s suit as lacking in merit.
The party had asked the appellate court to determine whether
the provisions of the Electoral Act in question are superior to the powers
accorded to political parties by the 1999 Constitution.
The party urged the appellate court to determine if the
electoral law was not an attempt to usurp the right of political parties to
decide how to conduct their internal affairs.
ANOTHER COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT
A separate panel of the court of appeal on Thursday
delivered another judgment that pertains to the conduct of the 2027 elections.
The panel of the court of appeal dismissed the judgment that
nullified the timelines issued by the Independent National Electoral Commission
(INEC) for conduct of party primaries and nomination of candidates.
In a unanimous decision, the appellate court affirmed the
guidelines issued by INEC for the 2027 elections.
In the lead judgment prepared by Adebukola Banjoko, but read
by Okon Abang, the Court of Appeal ruled that the Youth Party (YP), which
instituted the case against INEC, lacked the powers to do so.
In May, a federal high court in Abuja nullified the
timelines issued by INEC for the conduct of party primaries and the nomination
of candidates.
Advertise on NigerianEye.com to reach thousands of our daily users
No comments
Post a Comment
Kindly drop a comment below.
(Comments are moderated. Clean comments will be approved immediately)
Advert Enquires - Reach out to us at NigerianEye@gmail.com