In a disclaimer and public notice issued on Wednesday, the party said the suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/517/2026 and titled Youth Party vs. INEC, as well as the judgment delivered on May 20, 2026, by Justice M. G. Umar, were initiated without the authorisation of the party’s National Working Committee, NWC, or any recognised organ of the party.

The party maintained that neither its leadership nor any of its official structures approved the legal action against INEC, stressing that those behind the suit acted independently and without the mandate of the party.

According to the statement, the Youth Party remains committed to complying with the electoral guidelines and timetable issued by INEC ahead of the 2027 general elections.

It added that the party was not in conflict with the electoral body and had no intention of using the courts to undermine or circumvent lawful electoral processes.

“We dissociate ourselves entirely from this suit, its proceedings, and the judgment arising therefrom,” the statement reads in part.

“Furthermore, we wish to state clearly that Youth Party has consistently demonstrated its readiness and capacity to comply with the electoral guidelines and timetable issued by INEC for the 2027 General Elections.

Whilst, the time frame is short and challenging, we do not seek judiciary intervention. We are super focused on our National Convention fixed for Saturday, 23rd May and our primaries scheduled for  Friday, 29th May, 2026. ”

The leadership further warned that any individual or group that filed or prosecuted the matter in the party’s name without authorisation would be held personally accountable.

The disclaimer came amid heightened political activities and legal disputes linked to preparations for the 2027 general elections.

Although the party did not disclose details of the judgment in its statement, the development suggests possible internal disagreements over litigation purportedly undertaken on its behalf.

The party reaffirmed its commitment to lawful engagement with INEC and adherence to Nigeria’s electoral framework.

In the judgment, Justice M. G. Umar of the Federal High Court in Abuja restrained INEC from enforcing portions of its revised timetable and schedule of activities for the 2027 general elections, holding that several timelines imposed by the electoral body were inconsistent with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026.

The judge held that INEC exceeded its statutory powers by prescribing deadlines that abridged periods expressly guaranteed to political parties under the Electoral Act.

The suit was argued by J. O. Olotu for the plaintiff, while Sarafa Yusuf represented INEC.

In a series of declarations, the court clarified the scope of INEC’s powers regarding party primaries, submission of candidates’ particulars, substitution of candidates, publication of final candidate lists, and campaign activities.

Justice Umar held that Sections 29, 82, and 84(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026 do not empower INEC to prescribe timelines for political parties to conduct primaries for the nomination of candidates for the 2027 elections.

According to the court, INEC’s role is limited to receiving notices of party primaries, monitoring the primaries, and obtaining candidates’ particulars, but does not extend to fixing dates for the conduct of primaries.

The court further declared that under Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act, political parties were entitled to submit candidates’ particulars up to 120 days before an election and that INEC could not lawfully shorten that statutory period through its timetable.

Justice Umar also ruled that Section 31 of the Electoral Act allows political parties to withdraw and substitute candidates up to 90 days before an election, adding that INEC lacked the authority to impose an earlier deadline.

On the publication of candidates’ names, the court held that Section 32 of the Electoral Act did not permit INEC to publish the final list of candidates earlier than the minimum 60-day period prescribed by law.

The judge further ruled that INEC did not have the statutory authority under Section 98 of the Electoral Act to compel political parties to end campaigns two days before an election, as stated in the revised timetable.

The court also clarified that the timeframe stipulated by INEC for the submission of membership registers for party primaries did not apply to primaries conducted to replace candidates who voluntarily withdrew from elections.

Consequently, the court nullified the timelines contained in INEC’s Revised Timetable and Schedule of Activities for the 2027 General Elections relating to party primaries, submission of candidates’ particulars, withdrawal and substitution of candidates, publication of final candidate lists, and campaign activities.

Justice Umar held that the affected provisions of the timetable were inconsistent with the Electoral Act, 2026, and were therefore unlawful, invalid, and of no effect.

The judgment is expected to significantly impact preparations for the 2027 general elections and may compel INEC to review its timetable to align with the provisions of the Electoral Act.

The order was issued in Abuja under the seal of the court and signed by the Registrar, Mu’azu Kasimu.

READ ALSO:

Police arrest three suspects, recover suspected stolen vehicles

JAMB: How Professor Segun Aina’s age can be an advantage

Sanwo-Olu congratulates Hamzat on emergence as APC candidate

UN agencies step up Ebola response in eastern DR Congo

Ogun guber: Adeola wins APC ticket

Tinubu commends NDLEA on landmark success

Court voids INEC timetable for conduct of 2027 polls

Tinubu has plan to change Nigeria’s name, abolish Sharia law in the north -Presidency

Oyo bandits attacks: Slain Teacher Adegboye for burial Friday

ASUU slams FG over breach of 2025 pact, threatens strike

Five years on: Remembering Lieutenant General Ibrahim Attahiru

Lagos APC guber primary: Sanwo-Olu praises members for peaceful exercise

Marwa to Nigerians: Counter toxic culture glamorising drug abuse

JAMB releases 279 withheld UTME results

The post Youth Party rejects suit against INEC, says action not authorized appeared first on Frontpageng.