By Nathaniel..
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is under a fresh pressure to explain why a Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) governorship aspirant in Ogun State, Topa Olusegun Peter, was left off the final list of candidates for the February 6, 2027 governorship election.
Through his lawyers, Neplus Ultra Attorneys, Peter has given the commission 48 hours to verify his nomination records and publish his name as the PDP candidate if its records confirm he was duly nominated and there is no lawful basis for his exclusion.
The demand was contained in a letter dated October 14, 2026, addressed to the INEC chairman in Abuja, a copy of which was sighted by this newspaper.
The lawyers argued that INEC’s final list of candidates, published on October 10, did not contain Peter’s name, insisting he is the party’s duly nominated candidate.
According to the letter, Peter obtained the party’s expression of interest and nomination forms on May 12, 2026, and participated in its governorship primary held on May 27. The lawyers further claimed that the PDP forwarded his nomination particulars to INEC and that his name appeared as entry number 15,783 on the party’s membership register submitted to the commission.
They said Peter had not been given written reasons for the omission or notified of any objection that could explain the decision, urging INEC to cross-check the membership register, primary election records and nomination documents in its custody before deciding the matter.
Citing Sections 29, 32 and 77 of the Electoral Act, 2026, the lawyers argued that the commission should apply the law governing candidate nomination, membership registers and publication of candidates to the facts of the case.
They specifically referred to Section 77(5), which restricts eligibility to vote and be voted for in party primaries, congresses and conventions to members whose names appear on the relevant register, and Section 77(6), which prohibits parties from using a different register from the one submitted to INEC for those exercises.
The lawyers also referenced the Supreme Court decision in INEC v. Zenith Labour Party, identified in the letter as SC/CV/495/2026 and delivered on September 24, 2026, urging the commission to apply the court’s interpretation of the relevant provisions to its records concerning the PDP primary and Peter’s nomination.
They, however, acknowledged that the commission must establish whether the applicable statutory requirements were met and whether any court order or other lawful basis justified the omission.
The lawyers asked INEC to complete its verification within 48 hours of receiving the letter, correct the published list where the records establish Peter’s nomination and eligibility, and communicate the outcome of its review in writing.
They warned that failure to provide a substantive response within the stipulated period, or continued omission without a lawful and adequately explained basis, could lead to court proceedings seeking declaratory and mandatory orders, among other reliefs.
The lawyers said their demand was not an invitation for INEC to assume the role of a court but a request for the commission to review its records and perform its statutory duties in accordance with the law.
Discussion about this post