According to report by Nigerian Tribune on Tuesday, May 26, 2026, a Federal High Court in Abuja has ruled that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has the legal authority to issue and adjust election timetables, including the schedule of activities guiding political parties ahead of elections.
Delivering judgment on Tuesday, Justice James Omotosho held that the 2027 election timetable released by INEC which sets deadlines for party primaries and submission of party membership registers is valid and in line with the law.
The case, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/720/2026, was filed by the Social Democratic Party (SDP), with INEC as the sole defendant. The party challenged INEC’s powers in setting certain timelines for electoral activities.
Justice Omotosho explained that under Section 151 of the Electoral Act, 2026, INEC is empowered to make subsidiary regulations such as election timetables.
He noted that such timetables are essential for orderly conduct of elections and coordination of political party activities.
According to the judge, election timetables are more than just voting dates; they include a series of preparatory steps such as submission of membership registers, conduct of party primaries, nomination of candidates, and other processes leading to elections.
He warned that without a proper timetable, the electoral process would become disorganized.
However, the court also stressed that INEC must operate within the limits of the law. Justice Omotosho held that while INEC can issue and adjust timetables, it cannot shorten statutory deadlines set out in the Electoral Act, 2026.
Specifically, the court ruled that INEC acted beyond its powers when it reduced the 90-day period allowed for candidate withdrawal and substitution, as well as the 120-day window for submission of candidate names by political parties.
The judge ordered INEC to amend its 2027 election timetable to align strictly with Sections 29(1) and 31 of the Electoral Act.
He also declared that certain deadlines fixed by INEC for nomination submissions were invalid to the extent that they conflicted with the law.
While the SDP succeeded partially in its suit, the court affirmed INEC’s overall authority to set and modify election timetables, provided it complies with constitutional and statutory provisions. The court also ruled that the case was validly filed and not statute-barred.
