FEATURED

Court Nullifies INEC’s NDC Candidate List, Orders Owadara’s Return for 2027 Election

Published

22 minutes ago

October 28, 2026

A Federal High Court in Lagos has nullified the Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) publication of Ibrahim Lukman as the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) candidate for Oshodi/Isolo Federal Constituency I in the 2027 general election, ordering the commission to recognise Olumuyiwa Owadara as the rightful candidate.

In a judgment delivered on October 20, Justice Akintayo Aluko held that Lukman did not participate in the party’s primary election and that INEC acted unlawfully by publishing his name despite monitoring the exercise, in which Owadara emerged winner.

The court set aside INEC’s August 1 publication of Lukman’s name and particulars and directed the commission to immediately publish those of Owadara. It also awarded N1m in costs against INEC and Lukman.

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

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

Despite this, INEC published Lukman as the party’s candidate, leaving Owadara off its list. Owadara maintained that he had completed his nomination forms and submitted them to the commission.

INEC, in its defence, argued that it published the names uploaded to its platform by political parties, including the NDC.

However, Justice Aluko rejected the explanation, saying it was not supported by credible evidence.

“I am of the view that the evidence of the 1st Defendant that the names it published are the names uploaded on its platform by political parties including the 2nd Defendant is not supported or corroborated by any credible evidence,” the judge held.

The court noted that the NDC denied submitting Lukman’s name and accused INEC of imposing him on the party, arguing that the commission had no legal authority to do so.

Justice Aluko held that Lukman’s failure to participate in the primary deprived INEC of any lawful basis to publish him as the party’s candidate.

He described the publication as a violation of Sections 29(1), 32(1) and 84(1) of the Electoral Act 2026, which provide for the submission of candidates nominated through valid party primaries and INEC’s monitoring of such exercises.

The judge also found no credible evidence that the NDC had initiated the statutory process for replacing its candidate under Section 33 of the Act or conducted another primary election.

“There is no credible evidence before the court to suggest that the 2nd Defendant as a political party took steps to change its candidate in line with the provision of section 33 of the Electoral Act or that another primary election was held by the 2nd Defendant,” he said.

Convinced that Owadara had established his case, the judge held that the primary election was conducted in accordance with the party’s guidelines, constitution and the Electoral Act.

“It is my humble but firm conviction that the plaintiff has established by credible evidence that the primary election was conducted in consonance with the guidelines, constitution of the 2nd defendant and the Electoral Act and that the plaintiff emerged the winner,” Justice Aluko said.

He further ruled that INEC’s publication of Lukman’s name was “in violent breach of the Guidelines, the Constitution of the 2nd Defendant and the relevant provisions of the Electoral Act.”

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

The judge also dismissed Lukman’s challenge to the court’s jurisdiction, in which he sought to have the suit struck out over alleged improper service of the originating summons.

Lukman claimed he was in London when service was purportedly effected and denied ownership of the WhatsApp number and email address used.

However, the court noted that it had authorised substituted service on August 19 after the bailiff failed to serve him personally. According to the bailiff’s affidavit, the court processes were subsequently served through WhatsApp on August 24.

Justice Aluko found that the number used for service matched the one Lukman provided to INEC in his Form EC9, an affidavit of personal particulars sworn to on June 27 and tendered by Owadara.

“There is, however, credible evidence before the court to demonstrate that the 3rd Defendant is not truthful after all,” the judge said.

The court also considered WhatsApp exchanges between the lawyers representing Owadara and Lukman, which showed that the processes were exchanged on August 27, 28 and 31.

Relying on 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.

He further observed that Lukman filed neither a counter-affidavit nor a defence to the originating summons, leaving Owadara’s claims unchallenged.

Owadara’s legal team was led by Festus Ogun, Managing Partner of FOLEGAL, alongside Tofunmi Adetunji and Omobola Olayanju.

Reacting to the judgment, Ogun said it had reaffirmed the judiciary’s role in upholding the rule of law.

“We are most relieved that the court has demonstrated once again that it remains an impartial institution of trust which dispenses justice without fear or favour,” he told journalists on Tuesday evening.

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

“The last-minute announcement of an individual who never participated in the recognised primary election as a candidate is a stain on the process and institutions manning the election and a grave injustice against the legitimate winner, which should not be allowed to stand,” he said.

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

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

Onodi also submitted that INEC’s role in party primaries was limited to monitoring the process and seeking clarification where necessary.

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

Following the judgment, FOLEGAL wrote to INEC National Chairman on October 23, enclosing a certified true copy of the ruling and requesting immediate compliance with the court’s orders.

“We respectfully anticipate your earnest compliance with the said Orders of the Court,” the letter signed by Ogun stated.