Federal High Court Dismisses NDC Challenge to Electoral Act 2026
On Tuesday, the Federal High Court in Abuja dismissed a lawsuit filed by the National Democratic Congress (NDC) that sought to have Sections 138 and 77(5) of the Electoral Act 2026 declared unconstitutional.
Justice Muhammed Umar, presiding over the case marked FHC/ABJ/CS/635/2025, held that the suit lacked merit. The NDC essentially asked the court to interpret the Electoral Act alongside the 1999 Constitution, which falls within the court’s interpretative jurisdiction.
Procedural Defects Lead to Strike‑Out
The judge upheld a preliminary objection raised by the Clerk of the National Assembly, noting that the NDC failed to serve the required pre‑action notice before filing the suit. This omission rendered the case incompetent against the second defendant, prompting Justice Umar to strike out that portion of the claim.
Justice Umar also rejected the argument that the matter was a pre‑election issue merely because the Independent National Electoral Commission’s timetable was attached to the originating summons. He stated that attaching the timetable does not automatically place the dispute within the contemplation of Section 285 of the Electoral Act.
Substantive Findings on Sections 138 and 77(5)
Court found that Section 138 of the Electoral Act, which governs the qualification and disqualification of the Constitution –>
On the substantive issues, the judge held that while the 1999 Constitution sets out the qualifications and disqualifications for elective offices, the Electoral Act provides the procedural framework and timelines for challenging matters arising from party primaries.
He emphasized that any party wishing to contest a candidate’s eligibility on grounds that emerged from a primary election must do so at the pre‑election stage; waiting until after the poll is not permissible.
Justice Umar further ruled that Section 138 of the Electoral Act 2026, when read together with other provisions of the law, complements rather than conflicts with the Constitution. Consequently, the NDC’s claim of inconsistency was deemed without merit.
Regarding Section 77(5), the judge declined to invalidate the provision, citing a prior binding decision of the Court of Appeal. He stressed that courts are generally bound by judicial precedent, and the earlier appellate ruling remains authoritative.
Implications of the Ruling
The judgment upholds the challenged provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 and reinforces the principle that disputes over candidate qualification or disqualification stemming from party primaries must be resolved within the stipulated pre‑election period. The decision also underscores the importance of observing procedural requirements, such as serving pre‑action notices, to ensure the competence of suits filed before the Federal High Court.
