Get Guardian on GoogleThe Labour Party’s National Vice Chairman, South-West, Dr Arabambi Abayomi, has called on the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, to draw the attention of the National Judicial Council (NJC) to issues arising from the Federal High Court judgment recognising Ladi Adebutu as the Peoples Democratic Party’s governorship candidate for the 2027 Ogun State election.
In an open letter dated November 13, 2026, Abayomi expressed reservations about the judgment delivered by Justice Lifu, arguing that its interpretation of the Electoral Act 2026 raised questions about compliance with statutory provisions governing political party membership registers and participation in primary elections.
He maintained that the judgment appeared to give greater weight to the internal autonomy of political parties than to the requirements of Section 77(4), (5), (6) and (7) of the Electoral Act.
According to him, Section 77(5) restricts participation in party primaries to members whose names appear in the relevant membership register, while Section 77(6) provides that political parties must use the register submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
Abayomi argued that the production of a different membership register during court proceedings should not, by itself, be regarded as proof that the statutory requirements had been met.
He also raised questions about the evidence relating to Adebutu’s membership record, particularly the disputed serial number 1536.
The LP chieftain referred to testimony reportedly given by INEC’s witness, Mustapha Mohammed, concerning the absence of Adebutu’s name from the membership register submitted by the PDP and the identity of the person associated with the disputed serial number.
He urged that the evidential issues surrounding the competing membership records be carefully considered in any further judicial examination of the case.
Abayomi also cited the Supreme Court’s judgment of September 24, 2026, in the appeal involving INEC and the Zenith Labour Party, which upheld the validity of the relevant provisions of Section 77 of the Electoral Act.
He argued that the decision underscored the need for courts to give effect to the statutory requirements governing membership registers and participation in party primaries.
On INEC’s powers, Abayomi disagreed with the position that the commission lacked the authority to disqualify candidates, arguing that its statutory responsibility to monitor political parties and verify compliance with electoral requirements should be distinguished from the courts’ power to determine legal disputes over eligibility.
He said INEC should not be reduced to a mere administrative clearing house for information submitted by political parties.
“If INEC is truly a regulator, it should be allowed to regulate. It cannot see political parties breaking the law, breaching the Electoral Act and flouting its regulations and be helpless,” he said.
The LP chieftain also referred to a separate Court of Appeal decision in Appeal No. CA/ABJ/CV/569/2026, delivered by Justices Mohammed A. Danjuma, Adebukunola A. Banjoko and Oyejoju O. Oyewumi.
According to him, the appellate court had criticised proceedings conducted by Justice Lifu despite an earlier directive of May 22, 2026, concerning the suspension of further proceedings pending the determination of an appeal.
He quoted the appellate court as describing the conduct as “a form of judicial impertinence” and referring to Supreme Court authorities on disobedience of orders made by superior courts.
Abayomi cited the decision as part of the concerns he wanted the NJC to consider, although the appellate proceedings relate to a separate matter from the Adebutu judgment.
He called for the Adebutu judgment to be subjected to appellate review, particularly on whether the trial court’s interpretation of Section 77 permitted reliance on a membership register other than the one submitted to INEC.
He maintained that the statutory requirements governing party primaries should be considered in determining the validity of candidates’ nominations.
The letter urged the NJC to examine the concerns raised about judicial conduct and the implications of the judgment for public confidence in the administration of electoral justice.
