How legal challenges to electoral timetable create uncertainty for 2027 general election

…Cecilia Adams, Obono Obla lend voices

Legal challenges to the 2027 electoral timetable have plunged Nigeria’s election roadmap into intense logistical and strategic uncertainty.

A landmark judgment by the Federal High Court in Abuja, delivered by Justice M. G. Umar in a suit filed by the Youth Party, completely nullified key deadlines in the Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) revised 2027 timetable.

Speaking exclusively with BusinessDay in Abuja, former member, Presidential Constitution and Electoral Reform Committee (PCERC), 2016–2017, Cecilia Omonya Adams believes legal challenges and shifting electoral timelines disrupt political party preparations by draining financial resources, paralysing strategic planning, and fueling internal factional warfare especially the underfunded political parties.

Cecilia Adams, a prominent Nigerian international lawyer and politician, said the Federal high court judgement will strengthen the underfunded opposition parties who would have run out of cash before election day to now have enough time to mobilise resources for the 2027 general election.

Read also: INEC to appeal court ruling limiting powers over 2027 electoral timetable

She faulted INEC for not always considering smaller political parties when fixing dates for parties’ schedules and activities for the election.

Adams said the extended pre-election windows will expose deep rifts in major political parties’ leadership structure, given frustrated candidates advantage to switch parties.

Also speaking exclusively with BusinessDay is Okoi Obono Obla, legal practitioner, Human Rights Activist; former special adviser to President Muhammadu Buhari, and chairman of the Special Presidential Investigation Panel for Recovery of Public Property, said the recent courts judgments are landmark decision affirming that INEC must operate strictly within the boundaries of the Electoral Act, 2026.

Okoi Obono Obla said that INEC has to strictly follow the timelines stipulated in the Electoral Act 2026 including accepting lists of candidates from political parties not later than 120 days before the general election scheduled for January and February 2027.

Recent Court of Appeal ruling

The Court of Appeal has affirmed that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is legally empowered to issue and alter election timetables and guidelines.

However, recent appellate rulings have established that INEC cannot use these powers to shorten or override legally stipulated deadlines.

The courts however rule that INEC is vested with the constitutional and statutory mandate to issue, regulate, and alter election timetables, which cover voting dates, party primaries, and candidate nomination.

While INEC has the power to fix a framework and calendar, multiple courts have ruled that the commission cannot abridge or compress mandatory periods already set by the Electoral Act.

Pre-election litigation has shown that INEC cannot violate the minimum 120-day timeframe for political parties to submit the personal particulars of their candidates (Section 29) or the 90-day window for candidate withdrawal and substitution (Section 31).

Federal High Courts delivered conflicting judgements on whether INEC could dictate specific timelines for holding internal party primaries.

While Justice J.K. Omotosho ruled in favour of INEC’s power to set timeframes for primaries, Justice M.G. Umar issued a contradictory ruling in a separate case filed by the Youth Party (YP) stating that INEC could not impose such restrictive schedules.

INEC has actively appealed these specific lower court rulings to the Court of Appeal to maintain its regulatory latitude over the electoral calendar.