Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to reinstate the name of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) governorship candidate in Ogun State, Ladi Adebutu, on its candidates’ list within 24 hours.
Justice Lifu ruled that INEC lacked the power to unilaterally disqualify a candidate from contesting an election.
The judge also held that the commission breached Adebutu’s right to fair hearing by removing his name without giving him an opportunity to respond.
He noted that the power to disqualify a candidate after a political party has submitted the person’s name rests with the Federal High Court or a State High Court.
Consequently, he declared Adebutu’s exclusion unlawful, unconstitutional and of no effect.
The ruling followed the dismissal of INEC’s preliminary objection seeking to have the suit filed by the PDP dismissed.
In dismissing the objection, Lifu said he had examined the originating summons and found it competent.
“I have carefully assessed the originating summons, and I see that it bears the name of the senior counsel and was signed by him. It also has the names of other counsels in the law firm,” he said.
Adebutu’s suit against INEC
In the substantive suit, the judge said Adebutu stated that he contested the Ogun State governorship election in 2019 and emerged as the PDP’s candidate for the 2023 election.
He also participated in the party’s primary election for the 2027 governorship poll, after which his name was published by the party on August 29, 2026, without any challenge.
However, when INEC published its list of candidates in October, Adebutu discovered that his name had been omitted despite not withdrawing from the race.
The judge said the PDP and its National Secretary subsequently wrote to INEC on October 14, requesting that the commission reverse the decision, but received no favourable response.
INEC, however, maintained that it was bound by the provisions of the Electoral Act and urged the court to dismiss the suit.
One Umar Bature testified as the first plaintiff’s witness (PW1), while Mustapha Mohammed appeared as the defendant’s witness (DW1).
Bature, who identified himself as the PDP’s National Organising Secretary, said he was responsible for registering new members and maintaining the party’s membership register.
He told the court that the party submitted its membership list to INEC within the prescribed period on a flash drive, and that the list contained Adebutu’s name.
The judge also noted that Adebutu’s membership of the PDP had never been in doubt, adding that he was the first to register as a member on February 24, 2026.
Bature maintained that the removal of the candidate’s name was contrary to the law and urged the court to order INEC to publish it.
He further told the court that the flash drive presented by INEC was different from the one submitted by the party.
According to him, the PDP submitted the membership register on April 22, 2026, containing more than 30,000 members.
INEC witness’ testimony
The judge said INEC’s witness, Mustapha Mohammed, identified himself as a programme analyst who supervised the exercise conducted by Bature.
Mohammed told the court that the PDP submitted its membership register in both hard copy and electronic formats through a flash drive.
He said his department conducted a search before the publication of the final candidates’ list and discovered that Adebutu’s name was missing, although the name of his running mate was included.
However, during cross-examination, Mohammed admitted that he was not the person who received the flash drive from the PDP and could therefore not confirm its contents.
The issues considered by the court included whether INEC breached the plaintiffs’ right to fair hearing, whether the commission had the power to unilaterally disqualify Adebutu and whether it could remove his name from the candidates’ list.
On the issue of fair hearing, Justice Lifu held that the right was fundamental to Nigeria’s legal system and that no person’s rights could be taken away without giving them an opportunity to be heard.
The judge ruled that INEC breached Adebutu’s right by removing his name without first hearing from him.
“When a right is vested in a person, such right cannot be taken away without hearing from the person.
“Adebutu was not accorded the right to be heard before INEC took the decision. Therefore, the right to fair hearing of the plaintiff is breached,” the court ruled.
On whether INEC had the authority to disqualify the candidate, Lifu said the Supreme Court had not given the commission the power to independently remove the names of candidates submitted by political parties.
He maintained that the nomination of candidates was exclusively the responsibility of political parties, while any dispute requiring disqualification had to be determined by a competent court.
“INEC does not have the power to remove names or disqualify any candidate on its own. The power to disqualify a candidate after the name has been forwarded resides with the FHC or State High Court.
“The commission lacks the power to disqualify any candidate. Even if INEC believes that the name of a candidate was omitted, the commission must approach the court that has the power to remove the name,” he said.
The judge added that although INEC had the responsibility to monitor party primaries and ensure compliance with electoral laws, the evidence before the court showed that Adebutu was validly nominated at the primary election held on May 24.
He consequently resolved the second issue against INEC.
On the third issue, the judge said matters relating to nomination and publication of candidates’ names were pre-election matters.
He noted that Adebutu was declared the winner of the PDP primary election on May 24 and that no one had filed a suit challenging his nomination within the stipulated 14-day period.
Lifu questioned why INEC waited until August before taking action against the candidate.
“This court has established that INEC lacks the power to disqualify any candidate.
“INEC should have approached the court to disqualify the candidate, but it waited until after four months to take the action. This, to me, is an afterthought.
“If this is not resolved, there will be a day that INEC will disqualify a candidate a day to election. This must not be allowed. This would be an absurdity,” he said.
The judge also referred to Section 77(6) of the Electoral Act, which requires political parties to make their membership registers available not later than 21 days before an election.
He said only members whose names appeared on the register were eligible to participate in a party’s primary election.
According to him, the plaintiffs maintained that Adebutu participated in the primary and that his name appeared on the submitted membership register.
Lifu said INEC should have raised any concerns about Adebutu’s participation in its monitoring reports.
He added that the circumstances surrounding the case suggested that Adebutu’s name was included in the membership register submitted to the commission, with serial number 1536.
The judge said the court was therefore inclined to set aside INEC’s decision, noting that the commission had acted beyond its statutory powers.
He also faulted the testimony of INEC’s witness, saying the evidence of Bature remained unchallenged and uncontroverted.
According to the judge, Bature maintained that the flash drive submitted by the PDP was different from the one presented by INEC, while the commission’s witness admitted that he was not the person who received the device.
Lifu further noted that the witness initially claimed Adebutu’s name was missing from the flash drive but later admitted that he could not confirm what had been submitted.
He said the failure to call a material witness was fatal to INEC’s case.
The court consequently ruled in favour of the plaintiffs, holding that the commission acted beyond its powers.
“Consequently, the case of the plaintiff succeeds and is meritorious. The defendant acted ultra vires. INEC has no power, either administratively or otherwise, to remove a name if a candidate was validly nominated by the owner.
“The removal is unlawful, unconstitutional and of no effect,” Justice Lifu stated.
The court declared that INEC was obligated under the Electoral Act to publish Adebutu’s name and ordered the commission to amend the candidates’ list published on October 10, 2026, to reflect his candidacy within 24 hours.
It further ruled that INEC could not declare the result of the 2027 Ogun State governorship election without the participation of the plaintiffs, warning that any election conducted without them would be of no effect and unconstitutional.
