Full Details…..
The Movement for Credible Election (MCE) has noted with concern reports that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has appealed the recent declaratory judgment of Hon. Justice Umar, which nullified portions of the Commission’s Timetable and Schedule of Activities for the 2027 General Elections. [The Commission also reportedly seeks a “stay” of the judgment pending the determination of the appeal].
As a civic organisation committed to electoral integrity, we respectfully urge INEC not to proceed with the appeal, for the following reasons:
1. The Judgment Is Declaratory and Cannot Be Stayed
Justice Umar’s ruling is declaratory. It does not impose new obligations on INEC; it merely restates the clear provision of Section 29 of the Electoral Act, which allows political parties to submit their final list of candidates not later than 120 days before the election.
A declaratory judgment cannot be “stayed.” Attempting to appeal such a judgment raises the question of whether the Commission is seeking to overturn the law itself instead of clarifying its application and in whose interest.
2. INEC Does Not Require Early Submission of Candidates’ Names
INEC prints ballot papers using party names and logos, not the names of candidates. There is therefore no operational basis for compelling political parties to conclude primaries in May or submit candidate lists months earlier than the law requires.
An unnecessarily early timeline:
• creates avoidable pressure on political parties,
• undermines internal democracy, and
• increases the risk of procedural errors that will later fuel pre‑election litigations
3. INEC’s Credibility Depends on Remaining Neutral
Public trust is the most valuable asset of any electoral umpire. When INEC becomes a litigant against political parties over a timetable issue, it risks being perceived as an interested party rather than a neutral regulator. Such perceptions – even if unintended- can weaken trust and confidence among political actors and voters ahead of the 2027 elections.
Public Confidence Is Already Dangerously Low
Recent data underscores the significance of this concern. According to Afrobarometer’s 2023 survey, only 23% of Nigerians expressed trust in INEC, meaning more than three‑quarters of citizens reported little or no confidence in the Commission. That is an electoral emergency. At a time when the country is already anxious about preparations for the 2027 elections, INEC should be taking every possible step to rebuild public trust – not engaging in actions that risk pushing trust in the institution toward complete collapse. An appeal on a matter where the law is already clear sends the wrong signal to a public whose faith in the electoral process is already dangerously low.
4. INEC’s Mandate Is to Enforce the Law, Not Contest It
INEC is required to implement the law impartially. Appealing a judgment that merely affirms [and clarifies] the Electoral Act may be interpreted as the Commission taking sides. This perception alone can damage the legitimacy of the electoral process.
5. INEC Should Accept the Judgment and Focus on Delivering Credible Elections
We call on INEC to:
• accept Justice Umar’s judgment,
• align its Timetable and Schedule of Activities with Section 29 of the Electoral Act, and
• focus its energy on delivering credible, inclusive, and timely elections.
The law is clear and INEC must be seen to obey it as the Commission’s legitimacy derives from public trust, flowing from its neutrality, and fairness — not from acting like a political stakeholder with vested interests in how parties organize themselves internally. An umpire that expresses partisan interest ceases to be an umpire but interested stakeholder
What public good is served by deliberately abridging electoral timelines and shrinking democratic participation windows in ways that disproportionately suffocate young, growing, reform-oriented alternative political parties?
Why would an electoral commission in a democracy appear more interested in administrative convenience than in expanding political inclusion and participation?
Nigeria cannot claim to be practicing democracy while its electoral management body imposes electoral bottlenecks capable of strangulating emerging choices before they reach the ballot.
Signed:
Dr Usman Bugaje
Chairman
Dr Obiageli ‘Oby’ Ezekwesili
Co – Chairman
Hadjia Bilikisu Magoro, PhD
Deputy Chairman
Olawale Okunniyi
Head of National Secretariat
For: Movement for Credible Election, MCE,
Abuja, Nigeria