The Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to maintain status quo in a dispute over the party’s candidates that emerged from the Benue State APC primaries for the 2027 general election.
Justice Inyang Ekwo gave the order after counsel informed the court that parties had exchanged processes in a suit suit marked, FHC/ABJ/CS/1429/2026, filed by Engr. Sesugh Akaagba and other aggrieved APC candidates from Benue State against the APC and INEC.
Akaagba’s lawyer, Mr Mohammed Ndarani-Mohammed, SAN told the court that the matter was scheduled for the defendants to show cause why the reliefs sought in the plaintiff’s ex-parte application should not be granted.
He said the plaintiff had received the affidavits to show cause filed by both defendants in compliance with the court’s order and was ready to adopt the processes.
Counsel to the APC, S. D. Swem informed the court that the party had filed an affidavit to show cause and a counter affidavit to the plaintiff’s motion on notice but was yet to file its response to the originating summons.
Counsel to INEC, Mr Oluwole Olukunle, however, said the commission had responded to all the processes filed by the plaintiff.
The plaintiffs had, through an ex parte application filed on July 5, 2026, sought six interim reliefs, including an order restraining the APC from substituting its validly nominated candidates in Benue State through its June 29, 2026 correspondence, or any subsequent communication, to INEC, pending the determination of the substantive suit.
They also sought an order compelling the APC to immediately transmit to INEC the names of candidates validly nominated during the primaries monitored by the commission.
When the matter first came up on July 8, 2026, the court declined to grant the interim application immediately and directed both the APC and INEC to appear and respond before any decision was taken. The matter was adjourned till July 16.
At Thursday’s proceedings, counsel representing the APC and INEC were present in court, while the plaintiffs were represented by a team of lawyers led by Mohammed Ndarani, SAN.
In his ruling, Justice Ekwo held that, since issues had been joined by the parties, particularly with INEC now before the court, the defendants were required by law to preserve the subject matter of the litigation pending the determination of the substantive suit.
When counsel to the plaintiffs urged the court to caution the APC and INEC against taking any further action that could affect the disputed list of candidates, the judge responded that it was “not a matter of advice but of law,” stressing that the defendants were bound to maintain the status quo.
The court consequently restrained the APC and INEC from taking any action capable of altering the disputed list of candidates pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit.
The defendants did not object to the restraining order.
At the commencement of proceedings, the court noted that all parties had voluntarily submitted to its jurisdiction by duly filing and exchanging their respective processes.
It held that there was no procedural or jurisdictional impediment to the expeditious determination of the substantive action and directed that the matter be heard without further delay.
In furtherance of the objective of preserving the subject matter and safeguarding the efficacy of the judicial process, the court ordered all parties to maintain the status quo pending the hearing and final determination of the substantive suit, restraining any act or omission capable of prejudicing the rights of the parties or rendering the proceedings nugatory.
The court further directed that INEC be served forthwith with the originating and all consequential processes.
The matter was adjourned to July 21, 2026, for the hearing of the substantive suit.
END
Comments