Senate Rules Out Electoral Act Review Ahead Of 2027 Elections

The Senate has ruled out any immediate review of the Electoral Act 2026 following the Supreme Court judgment restoring provisions governing political party membership registers and candidate nominations ahead of the 2027 elections.

The Chairman of the Senate Committee on Media and Public Affairs, Yemi Adaramodu, said the National Assembly had completed the electoral reform process and would not alter the law while preparations for the 2027 elections were already underway.

Adaramodu stated this in an interview with The PUNCH while responding to questions on whether lawmakers would reconsider the Electoral Act following the Supreme Court judgment and concerns raised by political parties over some of its provisions.

“We have already done the electoral reform and passed that one. It is meant for the 2027 elections. It is only after it that we can consider it for a review if there is any necessity or calls for amendments and rejigging. That’s when it can come up,” he said.

The senator said anyone with concerns about the law could submit a petition to the Senate but maintained that the existing legislation was already in force.

“Anybody who has any petition against it should submit to the Senate. But for us at the Senate and National Assembly, we have passed the Electoral Act into law. It has been assented to, and it is now in use,” Adaramodu said.

He argued that changing the electoral framework while political parties were already selecting candidates for the forthcoming elections would amount to changing the rules in the middle of the process.

“As you know, it is through the Electoral Act that parties produced the candidates who will contest in January and February. So, are you now going to shift the goalposts in the middle of the game?” he asked.

“How do you halt an Electoral Act that is already in use for a new one? We are not going to do that.”

READ ALSO: State Police: Senate Says Federal Police Can Intervene Over Electoral Intimidation

The Senate’s position comes days after the Supreme Court restored Sections 77(5), 77(6), 77(7) and 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026, which had previously been nullified by the Court of Appeal.

A seven-member panel of the Supreme Court unanimously set aside the Court of Appeal judgment, holding that the disputed provisions were not inconsistent with the Constitution.

Sections 77(5), 77(6) and 77(7) deal with political parties’ membership registers and participation in primaries, while Section 84(2) provides for direct primaries or consensus as methods of selecting candidates.

The Supreme Court ruling has, however, generated questions about its potential implications for candidates whose party membership, waivers or nomination processes could be challenged.

Several political parties, including the Peoples Democratic Party, Allied People’s Movement and Labour Party, have maintained that their candidates remain eligible following the September 24, 2026, judgment.

Some candidates and political parties have also rejected suggestions that the ruling invalidates their candidacies.

The Nigeria Democratic Congress, NDC, for instance, dismissed concerns that the judgment could affect the candidacies of its presidential candidate, Peter Obi, his running mate, Rabiu Kwankwaso, and former Deputy Senate President, Ovie Omo-Agege.

The NDC National Publicity Secretary, Osa Director, said in an earlier interview with The PUNCH that the judgment should not be subjected to individual interpretations, adding that anyone challenging a candidate’s eligibility should approach the courts.

The Supreme Court ruling followed a legal dispute over the constitutionality of the provisions. The Court of Appeal had in July declared Sections 77(5), 77(6), 77(7) and 84(2) unconstitutional, prompting the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, to appeal to the apex court.

With the Supreme Court now restoring the provisions and the Senate insisting that the Electoral Act 2026 will remain the framework for the 2027 elections, Adaramodu said any consideration of further amendments would have to wait until after the polls.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.