September 24 Supreme Court Verdict: These Candidates May Lose Their Candidacy for 2027 Elections – Donald Duke, Kingsley Chinda, Pantami, Omo-Agege, Others
The Supreme Court’s September 24, 2026 judgment may have opened a fresh legal battleground for some politicians seeking elective office in the 2027 elections.
The seven-member panel, led by Justice Adamu Jauro, upheld INEC’s appeal and restored Sections 77(5), 77(6), 77(7) and 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026, which the Court of Appeal had earlier declared unconstitutional.
But the judgment did not disqualify any named candidate. Rather, it means that the legality of nomination processes can now be tested against those restored provisions.
What the law says
Section 77(5) provides that only persons whose names are contained in a political party’s membership register submitted to INEC at least 21 days before a primary, congress or convention can participate in that exercise.
Section 77(6) requires parties to use the same membership register submitted to INEC.
Section 77(7) provides that a party that fails to submit its membership register within the prescribed period cannot field a candidate for the election.
More Read
Meanwhile, Section 84(2) provides for nomination through direct primaries or consensus.
These provisions must also be read alongside the constitutional framework governing political parties under Sections 221 and 222 of the 1999 Constitution, while constitutional qualifications for governorship and other elective offices are provided under provisions including Sections 177, 178, 180, 181 and 182, depending on the office involved.
Candidates whose nominations could face scrutiny
Donald Duke — PRP presidential candidate: Duke joined the Peoples Redemption Party shortly before its May 25 presidential primary.
A fellow aspirant has challenged his membership status, alleging that Duke was not on the party’s membership register submitted to INEC on May 4, 21 days before the primary. The case is reportedly pending, with judgment reserved for November
Kingsley Chinda — APC governorship candidate, Rivers: Questions have been raised over his movement from the PDP to the APC and whether his membership status complied with the relevant register requirements before the APC primary.
Isa Pantami – PDP governorship candidate, Gombe.
More Read
His case is already before the courts. A Federal High Court in Gombe recently nullified the PDP primary that produced him and ordered a fresh exercise. The PDP has scheduled another primary for September 29.
Ovie Omo-Agege – NDC senatorial candidate, Delta Central: After losing the APC senatorial primary, Omo-Agege resigned from the party, joined the NDC and subsequently obtained its ticket through a consensus arrangement. His nomination raises questions concerning the restored Sections 77 and 84.
Victor Ochei – NDC senatorial candidate, Delta North: Like Omo-Agege, Ochei left the APC after its nomination process and subsequently obtained an NDC ticket after a party waiver and consensus process. His nomination could similarly attract scrutiny.
Former IGP Mohammed Adamu and Senator Saliu Mustapha have also been identified in current reporting as candidates whose nomination processes could face questions involving substitution, defection and party membership.
What the Supreme Court actually means
The crucial point is that the Supreme Court has not ordered INEC to remove these candidates.
Legal experts quoted by Punch stressed that the judgment did not automatically invalidate completed nominations.
Individual cases may require separate legal proceedings and factual determination, including whether the candidate’s name appeared on the relevant membership register, whether the proper nomination procedure was followed and whether any applicable statutory deadline was met.
In other words, the September 24 verdict has strengthened the legal importance of party membership registers and nomination procedures, but it has not, by itself, cancelled the candidacy of Donald Duke, Kingsley Chinda, Isa Pantami, Omo-Agege, Ochei or any other politician.
For the 2027 election cycle, the real battle may now be over the documents, dates and procedures behind each party ticket.
This report distinguishes between candidates whose nominations have been reported as potentially affected and candidates actually disqualified by a court.
It should be noted that the Supreme Court’s judgment itself did not name or disqualify any of the politicians listed above.
