The Youth Party has reversed its earlier disclaimer of a Federal High Court judgment delivered in its favour, announcing instead that it will actively defend the ruling at the Court of Appeal. The party’s reversal marks a significant turn in a legal and internal political dispute surrounding electoral timelines for party primaries ahead of the 2026 general elections.
Party’s Decision to Defend Judgment
In a statement issued by its Director of Communications, Solomon Oyekunle, the party confirmed that it had now resolved to fully defend the judgment delivered by Justice M.G. Umar of the Federal High Court, Abuja, in suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/517/2026, delivered on May 20, 2026. The ruling had challenged a directive issued by INEC setting May 30, 2026, as the deadline for all political parties to conduct their primaries.
Interpretation of the Ruling
According to the Youth Party, the judgment effectively nullifies the commission’s restrictive timetable and permits political parties to continue conducting their primaries beyond the May 30 deadline. The ruling, as interpreted by the party, allows presidential and National Assembly primaries to continue until September 18, 2026, while governorship and state assembly primaries may be conducted up to October 6, 2026.
The party further argued that the decision reinforces Nigerians’ constitutional right under the Electoral Act, 2026 (Amended), to freely associate with political parties of their choice and contest elective positions without what it described as “unfair and illegal restrictive deadlines” imposed by the electoral body. It also framed the judgment as a judicial check on what it called regulatory overreach by the commission, insisting that the court had restored balance in the electoral process.
INEC’s Appeal and Party’s Response
However, the electoral commission has since filed an appeal against the ruling and also sought a stay of execution pending the outcome of the appellate process. The Youth Party, however, maintains that the attempt to stay the judgment is legally misplaced, arguing that the ruling is declaratory in nature and therefore not subject to suspension. This legal disagreement is expected to form a central issue before the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, as both parties prepare for a potentially precedent-setting constitutional battle over the powers of the electoral regulator.
Internal Party Dynamics
In a notable twist, the Youth Party revealed that it had initially disclaimed the judgment shortly after it was delivered, due to internal concerns over how the case was initiated. According to Oyekunle, the party was “initially surprised” by the judgment because the suit was filed by one of its members without the knowledge or authorization of the National Working Committee (NWC). This prompted the party to issue a disclaimer pending an internal review.
The party also disclosed that the circumstances surrounding the unauthorised filing are currently being examined by an internal inquiry panel to further investigate the matter and prevent a repeat in future. Nonetheless, due to the legal and political implications of the judgment, the party said it has now ratified the suit and embraced the outcome. He added that the party had since concluded that the ruling serves the broader objective of expanding democratic participation and resisting what it now considers regulatory overreach.
Wider Legal and Constitutional Debate
The case, which pits the Youth Party against INEC, has quickly evolved beyond an internal party matter into a wider legal and constitutional debate over the extent of INEC’s regulatory authority in determining electoral timelines. At the heart of the dispute is whether the electoral commission has the legal power to impose strict deadlines on political parties’ internal nomination processes, or whether such directives infringe on constitutional freedoms and the provisions of the Electoral Act.
