By Our Correspondent
A chieftain of the Labour Party (LP), Dr. Arabambi Abayomi, has petitioned the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, urging the National Judicial Council (NJC) to intervene over the judgment delivered by Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court, Abuja, which recognised Hon. Ladi Adebutu as the Peoples Democratic Party’s (PDP) governorship candidate for the 2027 Ogun State election.
In an open letter dated November 13, 2026, Abayomi, the LP’s National Vice Chairman (South-West), expressed grave concerns over the legal reasoning behind the ruling, arguing that it raises fundamental questions about statutory compliance and the binding force of Supreme Court decisions.
Justice Lifu had, on Friday, ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to restore and publish Adebutu’s name on the final list of candidates for the Ogun State governorship election within 24 hours.
The court held that INEC lacked the constitutional and statutory powers to unilaterally disqualify a candidate validly nominated by a political party without an order from a competent court . Justice Lifu further ruled that INEC’s action in excluding Adebutu’s name without giving him an opportunity to be heard violated his right to fair hearing .
Adebutu had approached the court after his name was omitted from INEC’s published list of candidates on October 10, 2026.
Reacting to the judgment, the PDP candidate declared that “justice has prevailed,” thanking the party’s national leadership, including FCT Minister Nyesom Wike, for their support.
In his letter to the CJN, Abayomi contended that the judgment appeared to have elevated the internal autonomy of political parties above the mandatory provisions of Sections 77(4), (5), (6), and (7) of the Electoral Act, 2026.
He argued that Section 77(5) restricts eligibility to participate in party primaries to members whose names appear in the relevant membership register, while Section 77(6) expressly prohibits the use of any register other than the one submitted to INEC.
The LP chieftain submitted that the mere production of a different membership register during litigation cannot retrospectively validate an otherwise defective nomination without proof of its timely submission to INEC.
He drew attention to reported testimony from the PDP’s National Organising Secretary, who allegedly admitted under cross-examination that Adebutu’s name was absent from the register submitted to INEC, attributing the non-submission of another register to an error of omission .
“An admitted statutory default cannot ordinarily be cured by an explanation of administrative inadvertence,” Abayomi stated, further raising questions about the controversy surrounding serial number 1536 in the competing registers.
Abayomi also took issue with the implication that INEC lacks the power to verify compliance with electoral requirements. He argued that while political party autonomy is protected, it is not a licence to disregard express legislative prescriptions.
“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. He warned that decisions like the one delivered by Justice Lifu reduce INEC to “a mere clearing house for information” without the ability to compel compliance.
The letter also drew the CJN’s attention 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 Abayomi, the appellate court had criticised Justice Lifu for proceeding with a case despite a May 22, 2026 directive suspending further proceedings pending the determination of an appeal.
The panel reportedly described the conduct as “a form of judicial impertinence” and referenced Supreme Court decisions characterising deliberate disobedience of superior court orders as “judicial rascality”.
Concluding, Abayomi urged the NJC to examine the concerns raised about judicial conduct and the implications of the judgment for public confidence in electoral justice.
He called for the Adebutu judgment to be subjected to appellate scrutiny, particularly on whether the trial court’s interpretation of Section 77 permitted reliance on a membership register other than the one submitted to INEC.
“Where the statute prescribes the conditions for a valid nomination, neither political convenience nor judicial sympathy can substitute for obedience to law,” he stated.
Discussion about this post