APC Asks INEC to Enforce Supreme Court Ruling on Party Membership Registers

The All Progressives Congress (APC) has written to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), requesting the immediate enforcement of a Supreme Court judgment on the submission and use of political parties’ membership registers for primaries, congresses and conventions.

In a letter dated October 9, 2026, signed by its National Chairman, Prof. Nentawe Yilwatda, and National Secretary, Senator Surajudeen Ajibola Basiru, the ruling party urged INEC to verify compliance with the legal requirements and apply the penalties prescribed for violations, including disqualification from fielding candidates in the general election.

The request follows a Supreme Court judgment delivered on September 24, 2026, in the case of INEC v Zenith Labour Party, Suit No. SC/CV/495/2026. The court upheld Section 77 of the Electoral Act 2026 and overturned a Court of Appeal order that had declared certain provisions of the Act and part of INEC’s revised timetable for the 2027 general election unconstitutional.

The APC asked INEC to take three main steps. These include enforcing the judgment according to its legal effect, checking whether political parties submitted their digital membership registers within the period stipulated by law, and applying the consequences of non-compliance under Section 77(7).

It also urged the commission to ensure that only party members listed in the registers submitted to INEC are allowed to vote or contest in internal party elections.

The party cited Section 77(4) of the Electoral Act, which requires political parties to submit their membership registers to the commission at least 21 days before their scheduled primaries, congresses or conventions.

It also referred to Section 77(5), which limits participation in such internal elections to members whose names appear on the relevant register, while Section 77(6) prohibits parties from using a register different from the one submitted to INEC.

According to the APC, the Supreme Court explained on page 24 of its judgment that Section 77(7) could prevent a political party that fails to submit its digital membership register within the prescribed period from fielding candidates in the general election.

The party said the court’s interpretation confirmed that the statutory requirements were mandatory and that failure to comply could attract legal consequences.

The APC further cited the court’s observations on pages 25 and 26, stating that the purpose of Section 77 was to promote internal democracy by ensuring that party primaries, congresses and conventions were conducted fairly, transparently and in a verifiable manner.

The judgment also relied on Section 228(a) of the Constitution, which empowers the National Assembly to make laws on internal party democracy, as well as the Supreme Court’s earlier decision in Ardo v Nyako (2014) 10 NWLR (Pt. 1416) 591.

In that earlier case, the court held that although political parties have the authority to nominate candidates, the procedures for doing so must not be left entirely to the discretion of party officials.

The APC also referred to page 34 of the judgment, where the Supreme Court reportedly observed that INEC had provided political parties with sufficient time to submit their membership registers.

The party maintained that there was no reasonable justification for any political party to miss the deadline established by law.

It further argued that INEC, having been the appellant in the case, was bound by the Supreme Court’s decision. The APC cited Section 287(1) of the Constitution, which requires the decisions of the Supreme Court to be enforced by authorities, individuals and subordinate courts throughout the country.

The party insisted that compliance with Section 77 of the Electoral Act 2026 was a legal obligation rather than a matter of discretion, adding that INEC should apply the consequences prescribed for parties that fail to meet the requirements.

It warned that allowing political parties to disregard the statutory provisions without enforcing the penalties could weaken internal party democracy, electoral transparency and respect for the rule of law.