Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Adebayo Ojo, has dismissed reports suggesting that the Court of Appeal delivered conflicting judgments regarding the powers of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) ahead of the 2027 general election, insisting that only one appeal has been determined by the appellate court.
His clarification comes amid widespread media reports claiming that two separate panels of the Court of Appeal issued contradictory rulings on INEC’s authority to regulate election timelines and political party nomination processes.
Speaking during an interview on ARISE NEWS on Friday, Ojo explained that the only Court of Appeal judgment currently in existence was delivered on Monday in an appeal filed by INEC against the decision of Justice Mohammed Umar of the Federal High Court in Abuja.
According to Ojo, the original suit was instituted by the Youth Party of Nigeria, which challenged the provisions of Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act 2026 after the Federal High Court ruled that INEC lacked the authority to prescribe timelines for political parties to submit membership registers and lists of nominated candidates.
He said the Court of Appeal overturned the Federal High Court’s decision, not by ruling on the substantive issues raised, but after determining that the Youth Party lacked the legal standing, or locus standi, to institute the suit.
“The Youth Party of Nigeria lacked the locus standi to institute the lawsuit against INEC,” Ojo stated.
He added that the appellate court also found that the political party failed to demonstrate that it had suffered any restriction, inhibition or inconvenience as a result of the provisions of the Electoral Act being challenged.
Addressing claims of conflicting judgments, the senior lawyer explained that another Federal High Court decision delivered by Justice Emeka Nwite Omotoso in a separate suit filed by the Social Democratic Party (SDP) has not yet been considered by the Court of Appeal.
According to him, the appeal arising from the SDP case remains pending, making it impossible for the appellate court to have issued contradictory decisions on the same legal questions.
“The second one, the judgment of Omotoso, has not come before the Court of Appeal for determination. It has not come,” Ojo said.
He stressed that reports suggesting conflicting Court of Appeal rulings were based on a misunderstanding of two separate cases at different stages of litigation.
“The Court of Appeal cannot give a judgment in one case and then turn around and give a spontaneous contrary judgment in another matter,” he stated.
Ojo further maintained that only one appeal has been heard and decided by the appellate court so far.
“Only one appeal was heard, and that was the appeal by the Youth Party,” he said.
READ MORE: Oyebanji Re-Election Victory Earns Tinubu’s Congratulations
He also clarified that the Labour Party was not involved in either of the legal proceedings, contrary to some reports.
“The Labour Party did not file any case before the Federal High Court. It was the SDP that filed the other case,” he explained.
The senior advocate concluded that public confusion resulted from conflating the Court of Appeal’s ruling in the Youth Party case with the separate Federal High Court judgment involving the SDP, whose appeal is yet to be heard.
His remarks seek to clarify the legal position regarding INEC’s authority as preparations gradually gather momentum for Nigeria’s 2027 general elections.
