The Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to immediately publish the names of candidates submitted by the African Democratic Congress (ADC) for the forthcoming Federal Capital Territory (FCT) area council elections scheduled for February 21, 2026.
Justice Mohammed Umar gave the order on Tuesday while delivering judgment in a suit filed by 17 ADC candidates who challenged INEC’s refusal to grant the party electronic access to upload their details on the commission’s portal.
The plaintiffs had dragged both INEC and their party before the court, insisting that they lawfully emerged from ADC primary elections after paying a combined sum of over ₦20 million for nomination forms and winning their respective contests.
“I find the evidence of the applicants credible, and judgment is entered in their favour,” Justice Umar ruled.
The court consequently directed INEC to recognise and publish the plaintiffs as duly nominated ADC candidates for various chairmanship and councillorship positions in the 2026 FCT area council elections, having emerged victorious in their party primaries.
Justice Umar further ordered INEC to grant ADC electronic access to upload the candidates’ names, citing Sections 29(1), 31, 33 and 84(1)(5)(6) of the Electoral Act 2022, as well as relevant provisions of INEC’s Election Guidelines.
The candidates ordered to be uploaded on INEC’s portal include Jafaru Shaibu, Ayenajeyi Yakubu, Dauda Awode, Ezra Zaki, Sunday Abraham, Ayuba Adam, Jamilu Kabiru, Nuhu Madaki, Ibrahim Aliyou, Ogwuche Linus, Chibuike Anyika, Okechukwu Ironkwe, Godwin Adoga, Agada John, Onuoha Goodness, Mahrazu Bichi, and Tobias Obechina.
The plaintiffs were represented by Kalu Agu, while Agih Orji and INEC’s legal team appeared for the ADC and the electoral body respectively.
Why the candidates went to court
In a 27-paragraph affidavit sworn to by one of the plaintiffs, Goodness Onuoha, the candidates explained that 16 of them participated in substitution primaries following the withdrawal of candidates whose names had earlier been uploaded on the ADC portal before the August 11, 2025 deadline.
She added that the 17th plaintiff was nominated as a vice-chairmanship candidate for the elections.
According to Onuoha, after their emergence, ADC attempted to upload their Forms EC9 and EC13 to INEC’s portal but was denied access.
She stated that correspondence between ADC and INEC ICT staff revealed that the problem stemmed from INEC’s refusal to recognise the signatures of the party’s current national leadership—David Mark as national chairman and Rauf Aregbesola as national secretary—following a change in leadership.
“The access code earlier issued to ADC through the former national chairman could not be used by the current national chairman because INEC did not recognise the new signatures,” she said.
The plaintiffs also told the court that a formal letter written to INEC by their counsel requesting access was allegedly rejected, insisting that “INEC is hell-bent on denying ADC access to upload our names on the INEC portal.”
They further accused the ADC of abandoning them after collecting over ₦20 million in nomination fees.
‘INEC acted unlawfully’ — Court
In his judgment, Justice Umar held that all actions taken by the plaintiffs were within INEC’s official timetable and that the commission acted unlawfully by relying on a change in party leadership as a basis to deny access.
“The reliance on a change of leadership amounts to a failure and a fruitless excuse,” the judge said, noting that INEC’s action denied the candidates “the opportunity to complete the process of participation” in the elections.
He observed that the leadership change in ADC had been duly communicated and updated on relevant platforms, which, according to him, constituted sufficient notice to INEC.
Justice Umar also noted that the deadline for withdrawal of candidates was August 1, 2025, and that INEC was notified within the stipulated time.
“INEC, as the umpire of the election, cannot evade its statutory responsibility under Section 29 of the Electoral Act,” the judge declared, adding that “government is a continuum.”
He stressed that where an electronic access point becomes dysfunctional, INEC has a duty to provide a functional alternative.
Concluding, the court found the applicants’ evidence credible and ruled that they had complied with all legal and procedural requirements, paving the way for their participation in the February 2026 FCT area council elections.
