Human rights lawyer and political commentator Deji Adeyanju has called on the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to immediately implement the recent Supreme Court judgment concerning provisions of the Electoral Act 2026.
Adeyanju made the call in a statement on Monday, urging the electoral commission to take the necessary administrative steps to reflect the effect of the judgment on its official records and candidate portal.
He specifically asked INEC to remove the names of candidates affected by the Supreme Court decision from its official portal.
According to Adeyanju, the commission is constitutionally required to give effect to decisions of the Supreme Court under Section 287(1) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.
The constitutional provision states that decisions of the Supreme Court are to be enforced throughout the federation by all authorities and persons.
Adeyanju argued that INEC should therefore ensure that the court’s decision is fully reflected in its administrative actions and official records.
“The names of all candidates affected by the judgment should be removed from INEC’s official portal as part of the steps required to give effect to the Supreme Court’s decision,” he said.
He further urged the commission not to delay or selectively implement the judgment, but to take all actions necessary to comply with the ruling.
The development follows a Supreme Court judgment delivered on September 24, 2026, in which a seven-member panel allowed INEC’s appeal and restored key provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 that had earlier been invalidated by the Court of Appeal.
The restored provisions include Sections 77(5), 77(6), 77(7) and 84(2), which deal with political party membership registers and the procedure for nominating candidates.
Under Section 77(5), only persons whose names appear on the membership register submitted to INEC within the prescribed period are eligible to participate in party primaries, congresses and conventions. Section 77(6) restricts parties from using a different membership register for those exercises, while Section 77(7) provides consequences for parties that fail to submit the required register.
Section 84(2) provides for direct primaries or consensus as the methods for nominating candidates for elective positions.
The Supreme Court’s decision reversed the July 16 judgment of the Court of Appeal, which had declared the disputed provisions unconstitutional.
Adeyanju’s latest demand places the focus on how INEC will translate the apex court’s ruling into its official records and electoral administration ahead of the 2027 general elections.
