A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Adeboro Adamson, has described courtroom challenges to the omission of candidates from INEC’s remaining listing of candidates for the 2027 elections as a waste of time, citing the Supreme Court’s interpretation of Section 77 of the Electoral Act.
Recall that distinguished candidates have been omitted from INEC’s remaining listing together with former Communications Minister Isa Pantami, Ladi Adebutu, Aminu Abdussalam Gwarzo, amongst others.
Speaking with ARISE NEWS on Monday, Adamson Adamson stated the Supreme Court’s interpretation of Section 77 of the Electoral Act empowers INEC to exclude candidates whose events didn’t adjust to statutory membership registration necessities.
“The latest resolution of the Supreme Court within the case of INEC in opposition to the Zenith Labour Party has given INEC the ability to take away a candidate sponsored by a celebration with out compliance with the Electoral Act, particularly part 77 subsections 5, 6, and seven of the Electoral Act.
“The courtroom has urged that if a celebration didn’t adjust to that provision, the penalty, as laid out in part 77 subsection 7, is that the get together will probably be unable to submit or to substitute such a candidate.
“But for me, the provisions of part 77 have been within the Electoral Act from the start. So if a celebration didn’t learn the regulation and adjust to the regulation completely earlier than submitting their candidate, they’re on their very own.
“So, in other words, if they go to court, it will be a total waste of time.”
He argued that each candidates and their sponsoring events should bear the results of non-compliance with Section 77(7) of the Electoral Act, including that substitution deadlines expired on August 12, 2026, for presidential and National Assembly candidates, and September 19, 2026, for governorship and State House of Assembly candidates.
“The get together should adjust to the regulation. So when the get together fails to adjust to the regulation, then the get together should bear the consequence. That is the essence of part 77 subsection 7. And that’s what the Supreme Court has stated clearly right here.
“But the question is this: you cannot substitute a candidate if you are still within the time prescribed for substitution. Now, if you look at the National Assembly election and presidential election, the time for substitution ended on 12th August 2026. For governor and House of Assembly, 19th September. So it clearly means that after the judgment of the court, you can no longer substitute. That’s the end of the road for the parties, simple as clear.”
Blaming the affected events and their candidates, Adamson stated they’d themselves to carry accountable for failing to review and adjust to the Constitution, Electoral Act and INEC tips, stressing that ignorance of the regulation was no excuse for non-compliance.
“Just the way in which Bible is crucial to Christians, and Quran to Muslims, the Electoral Act is crucial to each political get together and their candidates. And bear in mind, ignorance of regulation isn’t excuse for something. So you must have studied your regulation. Critically, the structure, the electoral act, and the rule of INEC which are crucial to all of the events and their candidates.
“So if you don’t study and know it very well, who are you going to blame? You need to blame yourself.”
Favour Odima
Follow us on:
