Roadmap From Primaries To General Elections: Understanding the Law Governing Political Party Nominations and Elections in Nigeria -By Prof. Leonard Karshima Shilgba

One of the greatest threats to constitutional democracy is not merely political disagreement but widespread ignorance of the laws that govern democratic processes. Where civic knowledge is deficient, rumours become evidence, speculation masquerades as fact, and partisan wishful thinking is mistaken for legal reality. An uninformed populace often substitutes ignorance with gossip, conjecture, and social media propaganda.

Sadly, every election cycle in Nigeria witnesses an avalanche of assertions that candidates have been “substituted,” “replaced,” “removed,” or “imposed,” often by persons who have neither read the Electoral Act nor the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, and who possess little appreciation of the constitutions and guidelines of political parties or the jurisdiction of the courts. Legal questions are thus reduced to emotional arguments, partisan sentiments, and the seductive comfort of ignorance.

The burden of leadership extends beyond occupying public office or winning elections. It includes the strenuous responsibility of educating the uninformed, enlightening those willing to learn, and challenging those who prefer the illusion of knowledge to the discipline of understanding. Democracy thrives only where citizens understand the legal architecture that sustains it. Constitutional government cannot survive where rumours consistently outrank statutes and speculation supplants the rule of law.

This document is therefore intended as a civic guide to the lawful process by which candidates emerge—from the purchase of party forms to the conduct of general elections. It distinguishes party procedures from statutory requirements and clarifies the respective responsibilities of aspirants, political parties, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), and the courts.

The rule of law is not an inconvenience to be obeyed only when politically expedient. It is the very foundation upon which democracy rests.

THE ROADMAP

STEP 1: Party Timetable

Every political party publishes its timetable for the nomination of candidates.

The timetable specifies:

offices to be contested;

sale of Expression of Interest Forms;

sale of Nomination Forms;

screening requirements;

dates for primaries;

appeals procedure.

These matters are governed principally by the party’s Constitution and Guidelines.

STEP 2: Purchase of Forms

Interested party members purchase:

Expression of Interest Form; and

Nomination Form.

At this stage, they remain aspirants, not candidates.

STEP 3: Screening

The political party screens aspirants to determine compliance with:

constitutional qualifications;

statutory qualifications;

party requirements.

Unsuccessful aspirants may appeal where the party’s rules provide for an appeal process.

STEP 4: Notice to INEC

Before conducting primaries, the political party must notify INEC of:

date;

venue;

mode of the primary.

Legal Basis: Section 84 of the Electoral Act, 2022.

INEC’s responsibility is to monitor—not conduct—the primary election.

STEP 5: Conduct of Primaries

Political parties conduct direct or consensus primaries in accordance with:

the extant Electoral Act;

the party Constitution;

the party Guidelines.

INEC observes compliance.

The Returning Officer appointed by the political party declares the winner.

INEC does not declare winners of party primaries.

STEP 6: Declaration of Winner

Following counting of votes, the Returning Officer announces the winner.

The successful aspirant has emerged from the primary, subject to compliance with the Constitution, Electoral Act and party rules.

STEP 7: Appeal Committee

Most political parties constitute Primary Election Appeal Committees.

These committees consider complaints relating to:

irregularities;

exclusion of delegates;

breach of party guidelines;

improper conduct of officials.

Their authority derives from party constitutions and guidelines.

STEP 8: Nomination of Candidates

Following completion of lawful internal processes, the political party formally nominates candidates.

Nomination is an act of the political party.

Winning a primary ordinarily leads to nomination but remains subject to compliance with law.

STEP 9: Submission to INEC

The political party submits its nominated candidates electronically through INEC’s Candidate Nomination Portal.

Legal Basis: Section 29 of the Electoral Act, 2022.

Important distinctions:

Political parties nominate candidates.

Political parties submit candidates.

INEC receives nominations.

INEC does not nominate candidates.

STEP 10: Publication

INEC publishes particulars of nominated candidates as required by law.

Publication promotes transparency and enables lawful challenges where necessary.

STEP 11: Pre-Election Litigation

Any aspirant who participated in a primary and complains of non-compliance may approach the Federal High Court.

Legal Basis: Section 84(14) of the Electoral Act, 2022.

The courts—not INEC, not party officials, and certainly not social media—possess the final judicial authority to determine nomination disputes.

STEP 12: Campaigns

Campaigns commence within the period approved by INEC and must comply with the Electoral Act regarding:

campaign finance;

advertisements;

public conduct.

STEP 13: General Election

INEC conducts the general election.

Unlike party primaries, which are organised by political parties, general elections are conducted exclusively by INEC.

STEP 14: Declaration of Results

Returning Officers appointed under the Electoral Act declare winners.

The declared winner remains subject to any election petition.

STEP 15: Election Petitions

Election disputes are determined by the appropriate Election Petition Tribunal and appellate courts.

APPENDIX A

Principal Provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022

Section 28

Notice by political parties to INEC of conventions, congresses, conferences and primaries.

Section 29

Submission of list of nominated candidates by political parties.

Section 31

Withdrawal by a nominated candidate.

Section 33

Substitution of nominated candidates only in circumstances permitted by law.

Section 34

Death of a nominated candidate and consequential fresh primary where applicable.

Section 84

Nomination of candidates by political parties; conduct and monitoring of primaries; right of aggrieved aspirants to seek judicial redress.

APPENDIX B

Relevant Constitutional Provisions

President

Sections 131–137

Qualifications and disqualifications.

Governor

Sections 177–182

Qualifications and disqualifications.

Senate

Sections 65–66

Qualifications and disqualifications.

House of Representatives

Sections 65–66

Qualifications and disqualifications.

State House of Assembly

Sections 106–107

Qualifications and disqualifications.

APPENDIX C

Understanding Section 33 of the Electoral Act, 2022: Substitution of Candidates

One of the most misunderstood provisions of the Electoral Act is Section 33, which governs the substitution of candidates whose names have already been submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

The section provides:

“A political party shall not be allowed to change or substitute its candidate whose name has been submitted pursuant to Section 29 of this Act except in the case of death or withdrawal by the candidate.”

This provision establishes the general rule that, once a political party has submitted the name of its nominated candidate to INEC, that party cannot arbitrarily replace the candidate.

The Electoral Act recognizes only two statutory grounds for substitution after submission:

Death of the nominated candidate (read together with Section 34 of the Electoral Act); and

Voluntary withdrawal by the nominated candidate, communicated in the manner prescribed by law (Section 31 of the Electoral Act).

The Important Distinction

Citizens should carefully distinguish between substitution and judicial determination of the lawful nominee.

A substitution occurs where a political party voluntarily seeks to replace one duly nominated candidate with another. Section 33 prohibits this except in the limited circumstances expressly stated.

However, where an aspirant contends that the person submitted to INEC did not lawfully emerge from the primary election or that the nomination process violated the Constitution, the Electoral Act, the party constitution, or the party guidelines, the issue is no longer one of substitution. It becomes a pre-election dispute concerning the identity of the lawful candidate.

Under Section 84(14) of the Electoral Act, 2022, an aggrieved aspirant who participated in the primary election may approach the Federal High Court seeking appropriate reliefs.

If a competent court determines that another aspirant was the lawful winner of the primary or the lawful nominee of the political party, compliance with that judgment does not amount to an unlawful substitution by the political party. Rather, it is obedience to a judicial determination of who the law recognizes as the party’s candidate.

This distinction explains why references to “substitution” on social media are frequently inaccurate. Not every change in the name appearing on INEC’s records constitutes a substitution within the meaning of Section 33. Some changes result from the enforcement of court judgments declaring the lawful nominee.

Accordingly, every claim that a candidate has been “substituted” should first be examined against the Electoral Act, the Constitution, the political party’s rules, and any subsisting judgment of a competent court. Rumour is not evidence, and political propaganda is not law.

Guiding Principle

In constitutional democracies, neither political parties nor INEC have the final word on disputed nominations. Where disputes arise, the courts remain the constitutionally recognised arbiters. The supremacy of the rule of law requires that all political actors—and indeed all citizens—respect lawful judicial determinations rather than rumours, speculation, or partisan preferences.

FINAL OBSERVATION

A constitutional democracy is sustained by fidelity to lawful procedures rather than devotion to personalities. Political parties must obey their constitutions and the Electoral Act. INEC must discharge its statutory responsibilities impartially. Courts must adjudicate disputes independently. Citizens must resist the temptation to elevate rumours above law and propaganda above evidence.

The greatest enemy of constitutional government is not merely the politician who violates the law; it is also the citizen who applauds such violation because it temporarily favours his political preference. Selective obedience to the law inevitably matures into general lawlessness. Once society embraces that path, no one’s rights remain secure.

Democracy survives only where the rule of law is applied consistently—to allies and opponents alike. The law must remain supreme over personalities, political expediency, and partisan passions. That is the surest guarantee of credible elections, accountable governance, and enduring constitutional order.

Leonard Karshima Shilgba, PhD (Yokohama)

Professor of Mathematics, Admiralty University of Nigeria (ADUN)

Dean, Faculty of Science, ADUN

Former Pioneering Acting Vice Chancellor/President, ADUN

Former Pioneering Vice President for Academic Affairs, ADUN

Former Director of Academic Planning and Quality Assurance, ADUN

Chairman, 9th Governing Board, National Business and Technical Examinations Board (NABTEB)

TEL: +234 (0) 9074346000

Website: www.adun.edu.ng 

Author Website: www.leonardshilgba.com; ORCID: Leonard Karshima Shilgba (0009-0006-2670-1181) – My ORCID;  ResearchGate: Leonard Shilgba;  Googlescholar: ‪Leonard Karshima Shilgba – ‪Google Scholar