The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has approached the Court of Appeal to challenge a Federal High Court judgment that nullified its revised timetable and schedule of activities for the 2027 general elections.
In a notice of appeal dated May 25 and filed by its counsel, Alex Izinyon, SAN, the electoral body also applied for a stay of execution of the judgment pending the determination of the appeal.
INEC, which raised nine grounds of appeal, argued that the trial judge, Justice Mohammed Umar, erred in law by failing to determine its objection that the suit filed against the commission was hypothetical and academic in nature.
According to the commission, the judge’s failure to address the jurisdictional issue amounted to a denial of fair hearing.
The electoral body further contended that the court adopted a narrow interpretation of Sections 29(1), 82 and 84 of the Electoral Act, 2026, insisting that the provisions did not support the conclusions reached in the judgment.
INEC also argued that the trial court failed to properly apply the provisions of Section 151 of the Electoral Act, 2026 to the matter before it.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the Youth Party (YP), which instituted the original suit, was listed as the respondent in the appeal.
Among the reliefs sought by INEC are an order allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgment delivered by Justice Umar on May 20 in suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/517/2026 between the Youth Party and INEC.
The commission also asked the appellate court to strike out the suit on the grounds that the Youth Party lacked the legal standing to institute the action and that the case was merely academic.
In a related motion filed before the Federal High Court, INEC requested an order staying the execution or further execution of the judgment pending the outcome of the appeal.
Justice Umar had, in his May 20 ruling, voided INEC’s timetable for the 2027 elections after holding that the commission lacked the statutory authority to impose timelines for political parties to conduct primaries and other pre-election activities.
The court ruled that the timetable introduced restrictive deadlines inconsistent with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026.