With four opposition political parties producing more than one presidential candidate at the end of their primaries, the Independent National Electoral Commission has once again come under heavy scrutiny, Davidson Iriekpen writes
By the time the primaries of the political parties ended on May 30, four opposition parties, African Democratic Party (ADC), People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Labour Party (LP) and Social Democratic Party (SDP) submitted the names of more than one presidential candidate each to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
While the ADC submitted the names of three candidates to the commission, PDP, LP and SDP came up with two each based on their factionalisation. Though INEC did not witness some of the primaries, the various factions of the opposition political parties communicated their intentions to hold the elections to the electoral umpire.
Even when the electoral commission has until August 29, 2026, to publish the final names of the presidential candidates of the political parties based on its guidelines, not a few have argued that by allowing illegal factions to hold alternative primaries, the electoral umpire is complicit in destabilising the parties.
They argued that in as much as the political parties share in the blame by not strictly adhering to and abiding by their internal mechanisms to resolve their crises, INEC’s lackadaisical attitude or its lack of decisive intervention as the regulator of political parties makes it guilty of bias.
Already, the electoral process has come under scrutiny as its integrity is being questioned by opposition parties, which feel that the incessant legal disputes, administrative decisions, and internal party crises are being leveraged to further weaken candidates.
The commission had – in the past – been accused of playing an active role in internal party disputes, particularly within LP. It is somewhat believed that the political standing of former Anambra State governor and 2023 LP presidential candidate, Mr. Peter Obi, who many analysts regard as a significant challenge to the ruling APC, remains at the centre of this controversy.
Opposition figures allege that state institutions, including INEC and elements of the judiciary, are being deployed to weaken opposition platforms and limit Obi’s political options ahead of the next election cycle. INEC’s refusal to recognise the Nenadi Usman–led caretaker committee of the LP emerged as a focal point of the dispute.
Critics noted that the commission formally invoked the Supreme Court ruling several months after it was delivered, a delay that fuelled allegations of selective interpretation of judicial decisions.
The controversy deepened following Obi’s resignation from the party on December 31, 2025. Within a week of his exit, INEC announced its reliance on the April judgment to justify its stance, prompting opposition figures to argue that the dispute was less about procedural compliance and more about Obi’s continued political relevance.
Thus, its constant involvement in political party conflicts raises doubts about its independence now that the 2027 general election is near.
Many analysts have continued to highlight perceived inconsistencies in INEC’s approach, including its willingness to act on Federal High Court rulings in some cases while insisting on Supreme Court judgments in others. Such actions, they argue, reinforce concerns that the commission’s decisions are influenced by prevailing political pressures rather than a clear, uniform administrative standard.
The same accusation trailed the commission’s interpretation of the Court of Appeal ruling on the maintenance status quo ante bellum, which it relied upon to withdraw recognition of the Senator David Mark-led NWC of the ADC. The decision created a leadership vacuum and exposed the commission’s bias towards opposition political parties.
Also, in spite of the judgment of the Supreme Court which dismissed the cross-appeal by the Nyesom Wike-led PDP, the commission has remained silent for crisis to continue to tear the party apart.
However, INEC has consistently denied allegations of partisanship, maintaining that its actions are guided strictly by the law and existing court judgments.
Last March, INEC Chairman, Prof. Joash Amupitan (SAN), lamented that recurring leadership tussles and protracted intra-party disputes are diverting its attention from core election planning ahead of the 2027 general election.
Despite the denial, the winner of the ADC presidential primary, former Vice President, Atiku Abubakar, in his acceptance speech shortly after his victory, blamed the leadership crisis in the opposition political parties on the All Progressives Congress (APC), INEC and elements in the judiciary.
“As I speak, virtually all opposition political parties in the country have leadership crises engineered by the APC government, the INEC and elements in the judiciary. And opposition figures continue to be harassed and intimidated, including those languishing in detention, such as Mallam Nasir El-Rufai who distinguished himself as a public servant, including as a minister and two-term Governor of Kaduna State.”
Former member of the House of Representatives and chieftain of the Peoples Redemption Party (PRP), Usman Bugaje also stated that the government is working with INEC to sabotage opposition political parties.
Similarly, legal scholar and political analyst, Dr. Sam Amadi, said the country’s electoral system and judicial institutions have become central drivers of the growing instability within political parties, arguing that inconsistent rulings, unclear regulatory directions, and conflicting administrative decisions are worsening internal disputes and weakening party cohesion across the political space.
Amadi linked the escalating crises in parties such as the ADC and others to what he described as a systemic failure of clarity and authority in both INEC’s management of political parties and the courts’ handling of intra-party disputes.
Former National Chairman of the Inter-Party Advisory Council (IPAC), Chief Peter Ameh, urged INEC to address what he described as a lingering credibility crisis. He added that the trust deficit arising from the handling of the 2023 presidential election had not been remedied.
The Foundation for Environmental Rights Advocacy and Development (FENRAD) likewise warned that this trend could undermine Nigeria’s democracy ahead of the 2027 general election.
Its Executive Director, Nelson Nwafor, expressed deep concern over recent developments involving INEC and court interventions in the leadership crisis within opposition political parties, including the ADC, the PDP, and LP, noting that the situation raises “critical legal and constitutional questions regarding the scope of INEC’s powers, the binding nature of court orders, and the broader implications for Nigeria’s democratic stability.”
The group stressed that INEC must exercise its powers with “clarity, consistency, and independence,” warning that failure to do so could deepen ambiguity and destabilise party structures.
Similarly, a coalition of civil society organisations under the Network of Civil Society Groups also urged INEC to resist being used as a political tool amid the ongoing leadership crisis within the ADC. Its leader, Comrade Yaya Ademola, alleged that INEC is being manipulated to remove the lawful leadership of the ADC under the pretext of court judgments.
The group warned that if the crisis persists, it could undermine opposition parties, effectively clearing the path for President Bola Tinubu to secure a second term in the 2027 elections.
With the growing concerns about INEC’s interference in political party disputes, the commission needs more than just rhetoric to assure Nigerians that the 2027 general election will be free and fair.
POLITICAL NOTES
