By Isa Abdul, Abuja

Portions of the Electoral Act 2026 that were earlier invalidated by the Court of Appeal have been restored by the Supreme Court, in a ruling on Thursday.

The apex court in a unanimous decision upheld the appeal filed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) challenging the appellate court’s judgment.

In its lead verdict, delivered by Justice Adamu Jauro, the Supreme Court specifically validated the provisions of sections 77(5), (6) and (7), as well as 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026, which regulate the membership registers of political parties and the procedure for the nomination of candidates for the 2027 general elections.

It faulted the appellate court for upholding an appeal filed by the Zenith Labour Party (ZLP) against those portions of the electoral law.
According to the apex court, the contested sections of the Electoral Act were not in conflict with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.

Stressing that the ZLP’s appeal ought to have been dismissed, the panel went ahead to reinstate the judgment of the Federal High Court on the matter.

Aside from dismissing the appeal, the Supreme Court awarded costs of N2 million against the ZLP, which was listed as a respondent in the appeal.

We recall that the Abuja Division of the appellate court had, on July 16, struck down portions of the Electoral Act for being inconsistent with the Constitution.

The appellate court, in a unanimous decision by a three-member panel, held that the sections were at variance with the provisions of sections 221 and 222 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, which give political parties the right to decide whom to sponsor in an election.

The judgment followed an appeal marked CA/ABJ/CV/750/2026, which the ZLP lodged against INEC.

The ZLP had gone to the appellate court to challenge the dismissal of a suit it filed to query the constitutionality of some provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 relating to the membership registers of political parties and the conduct of primary elections.

Section 77(5) of the Electoral Act stipulates that only persons whose names are contained in the register submitted to INEC not later than 21 days before the date fixed for primaries, congresses or conventions are eligible to vote.

Sub-section (6) provides that a political party shall not use any other register for party primaries, congresses and conventions except the register submitted to the Commission.

Likewise, sub-section (7) provides that a political party that fails to submit its membership register within the stipulated time shall not be eligible to field a candidate for the election.

On the other hand, section 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026 provides that the procedure for the nomination of candidates by political parties for the various elective positions shall be by direct primaries or consensus.

The appellate court, in its lead verdict delivered by Justice Eberechi Nyesom-Wike, found merit in the case the ZLP brought before it.

However, dissatisfied with the invalidation of sections of the Electoral Act 2026, INEC took the matter before the Supreme Court.

While the electoral body, in the appeal marked SC/CR/495/2026, urged the apex court to allow the appeal and overturn the appellate court’s decision, the ZLP sought its dismissal for want of merit.

Justice Mohammed Umar of the Federal High Court in Abuja had, on May 5, dismissed the ZLP’s case as lacking in merit.

Dissatisfied with the verdict, the political party approached the appellate court and asked it to determine, among other things, whether the stated provisions of the Electoral Act are superior to the powers conferred on political parties by the 1999 Constitution, as amended.

The party urged the appellate court to determine whether the electoral law was an attempt to usurp the right of political parties to decide how to conduct their internal affairs.

In its judgment, the appellate court noted that sections 177 and 182 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, already listed the qualifying and disqualifying factors for political parties and candidates in an election.

It held that no other condition contained in a subsidiary law could disqualify an individual already qualified by the Constitution.By Isa Abdul, Abuja

Portions of the Electoral Act 2026 that were earlier invalidated by the Court of Appeal have been restored by the Supreme Court, in a ruling on Thursday.

The apex court in a unanimous decision upheld the appeal filed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) challenging the appellate court’s judgment.

In its lead verdict, delivered by Justice Adamu Jauro, the Supreme Court specifically validated the provisions of sections 77(5), (6) and (7), as well as 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026, which regulate the membership registers of political parties and the procedure for the nomination of candidates for the 2027 general elections.

It faulted the appellate court for upholding an appeal filed by the Zenith Labour Party (ZLP) against those portions of the electoral law.

According to the apex court, the contested sections of the Electoral Act were not in conflict with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.

Stressing that the ZLP’s appeal ought to have been dismissed, the panel went ahead to reinstate the judgment of the Federal High Court on the matter.

Aside from dismissing the appeal, the Supreme Court awarded costs of N2 million against the ZLP, which was listed as a respondent in the appeal.

We recall that the Abuja Division of the appellate court had, on July 16, struck down portions of the Electoral Act for being inconsistent with the Constitution.

The appellate court, in a unanimous decision by a three-member panel, held that the sections were at variance with the provisions of sections 221 and 222 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, which give political parties the right to decide whom to sponsor in an election.

The judgment followed an appeal marked CA/ABJ/CV/750/2026, which the ZLP lodged against INEC.

The ZLP had gone to the appellate court to challenge the dismissal of a suit it filed to query the constitutionality of some provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 relating to the membership registers of political parties and the conduct of primary elections.

Section 77(5) of the Electoral Act stipulates that only persons whose names are contained in the register submitted to INEC not later than 21 days before the date fixed for primaries, congresses or conventions are eligible to vote.

Sub-section (6) provides that a political party shall not use any other register for party primaries, congresses and conventions except the register submitted to the Commission.

Likewise, sub-section (7) provides that a political party that fails to submit its membership register within the stipulated time shall not be eligible to field a candidate for the election.

On the other hand, section 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026 provides that the procedure for the nomination of candidates by political parties for the various elective positions shall be by direct primaries or consensus.

The appellate court, in its lead verdict delivered by Justice Eberechi Nyesom-Wike, found merit in the case the ZLP brought before it.

However, dissatisfied with the invalidation of sections of the Electoral Act 2026, INEC took the matter before the Supreme Court.

While the electoral body, in the appeal marked SC/CR/495/2026, urged the apex court to allow the appeal and overturn the appellate court’s decision, the ZLP sought its dismissal for want of merit.

Justice Mohammed Umar of the Federal High Court in Abuja had, on May 5, dismissed the ZLP’s case as lacking in merit.

Dissatisfied with the verdict, the political party approached the appellate court and asked it to determine, among other things, whether the stated provisions of the Electoral Act are superior to the powers conferred on political parties by the 1999 Constitution, as amended.

The party urged the appellate court to determine whether the electoral law was an attempt to usurp the right of political parties to decide how to conduct their internal affairs.

In its judgment, the appellate court noted that sections 177 and 182 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, already listed the qualifying and disqualifying factors for political parties and candidates in an election.

It held that no other condition contained in a subsidiary law could disqualify an individual already qualified by the Constitution.

By Felix Umande

The governorship candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Benue State, Chief Michael Aondoakaa, SAN, has promised to establish specialized healthcare (geriatric) units for elderly people in hospitals across the state, with free basic treatment and minor surgical procedures for senior citizens, if elected in 2027.

Aondoakaa, a former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, said the initiative is part of a broader agenda focused on security, accessible healthcare, pensioners’ welfare and prudent management of public resources.

Speaking during an exclusive interview with Agate Radio on Tuesday, monitored by Press Icon correspondent in Makurdi, the PDP candidate argued that government has a moral and constitutional responsibility to provide care for elderly citizens who have spent their productive years contributing to society.

According to him, the proposed geriatric units would be equipped to provide specialized medical attention in a conducive environment, with elderly patients receiving free basic healthcare services and minor surgical interventions.

“We have a duty to care for our elderly people who are in their late 60s, 70s, 80s and older. Beyond government responsibility, it is part of our African culture to honour and support those who have worked hard and sacrificed for society. They deserve access to quality healthcare and dignity in old age,” Aondoakaa said.

He added that healthcare and security would rank among the foremost priorities of his administration, stressing that government must guarantee both the safety and well-being of citizens. In his words:

“Our healthcare system must be responsive to the needs of ordinary people, especially the vulnerable and the elderly. At the same time, government must take seriously its responsibility to protect lives and property because security is the foundation of development.”

On livestock management and the recurring debate over ranching, Aondoakaa maintained that ranching is fundamentally a private business venture and should not be driven by government.

“Ranching is a private enterprise. Government’s role is to create an enabling environment, not to take over the business itself,” he said.

The PDP candidate also criticized the hardship faced by many retired civil servants, expressing concern over the non-payment of pensions and gratuities despite what he described as substantial financial resources available to the present administration.

He argued that workers who dedicated decades of service to the state should not be subjected to uncertainty and deprivation after retirement.

Aondoakaa further contended that payment of salaries, pensions and gratuities should not be presented as an achievement, insisting that such obligations are fundamental responsibilities of public administration.

“Salaries and pensions are not favours. They are obligations arising from the relationship between government and its workers. Fulfilling those obligations should be routine and not something that is celebrated as an extraordinary achievement,” he added.

On infrastructure, the PDP flag bearer promised a more consultative and professionally driven approach to project execution, saying major projects would be subjected to rigorous scrutiny to ensure value for money.

He said ministries, technical experts and other relevant stakeholders would be actively involved in project conception and implementation to ensure public investments address actual needs.

“There will be proper consultation before major projects are undertaken. Our focus will be on infrastructure that improves the lives of the people and delivers measurable value for public funds,” he stated.

Aondoakaa also pledged to draw more extensively on the expertise of career civil servants, describing the public service as a reservoir of institutional memory and technical competence that has been underutilised.

“Our civil servants possess invaluable knowledge and experience. They understand the workings of government and should be actively involved in planning and implementing development projects. We must make better use of that expertise,” he said.

By Felix Umande

The All Progressives Congress Presidential Campaign Council has described African Democratic Congress (ADC) candidate Atiku Abubakar as unfit to be President of Nigeria, alleging that fresh revelations at an international arbitration in Paris have linked him to corruption in the stalled Mambilla Hydroelectric Power Project.

In a statement issued on September 18, 2026, by its spokesman, Dele Alake, the APC Campaign said hearings at the International Arbitration Tribunal under the auspices of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) in a case filed by Sunrise Power and Transmission Company Ltd and Leno Adesanya over the 3,960MW Mambilla project in Taraba State revealed that Atiku and former Power Minister Olu Agunloye worked together to sign an illegal power contract.

The Council alleged that the contract was signed through the backdoor in the dying days of former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s first term, when Atiku wielded enormous power, despite Obasanjo’s objection at the Federal Executive Council meeting.

According to the statement, months after the alleged signing, Leno Adesanya, through an offshore account, China Castle Investment, wired $500,000 to the US Citibank account of Atiku’s now-divorced wife, Jennifer Douglas. The APC said the wired money and other suspicious transfers totalling $40 million surfaced in a US Senate investigation titled “Keeping Foreign Corruption out of the United States: Four Case Histories.”

The Campaign quoted the ICC Paris Tribunal as concluding: “There is a close connection in time between the moment the USD 500,000 payment was made to the wife of Vice-President Abubakar on 30 January 2003 and the alleged award of the BOT contract to Sunrise on 22 May 2003.”

It said the alleged action led Sunrise and Adesanya to file claims against Nigeria demanding $680 million as settlement and interest in another arbitration claiming over $2.7 billion in compensation relating to the Mambilla project.

“By collecting a $500,000 bribe from Leno Adesanya to approve a Build-Operate-Transfer contract to a company with no scintilla of experience in hydro power generation, Atiku has proven he is one of the enablers of local and international predatory and exploitative entities out to defraud our country,” the statement said.

The APC Campaign further alleged that Atiku stayed away from the Paris hearing to avoid embarrassment and that while Adesanya shielded him, former Presidents Olusegun Obasanjo and Muhammadu Buhari went to Paris to defend Nigeria.

The statement referenced former President Obasanjo’s remarks on Atiku in his book, My Watch, and called on the ADC candidate to bow out of the presidential race, saying the $500,000 bribe is “just the tip of the iceberg.”

The APC also said the people of Taraba State should note that Atiku is one of those responsible for the stalled kick-off of what would have been the biggest hydropower project in Nigeria.

Atiku Abubakar and Sunrise Power have previously denied wrongdoing in the Mambilla contract dispute, which has been the subject of prolonged litigation and arbitration.