Court Hears Substituted Benue APC Candidates’ Suit August 27

A Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed August 27 for definite hearing in a suit filed by “validly elected candidates” of the Benue State chapter of the All Progressives Congress (APC), challenging their substitution for the 2027 general elections.

Justice Inyang Ekwo adjourned the matter at the instance of counsel to the plaintiffs, Mohammed Ndarani (SAN), who sought time to respond to a preliminary objection filed by the APC, the first defendant, challenging the court’s jurisdiction to hear the suit.

Justice Ekwo directed the counsel to the parties to file and exchange their processes before the next adjourned date, warning that any counsel who failed to do so would be sanctioned.

Matthew Burka appeared for the APC, while the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the second defendant, was represented by Oluwole Olukunle.

The adjournment followed an earlier order by the court directing the APC and INEC to maintain the status quo in the dispute over candidates who emerged from the party’s Benue State primaries.

The order was made last Thursday during proceedings in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1429/2026, filed by Engr. Sesugh Kaaba and other aggrieved APC candidates from Benue State against the party and the electoral commission.

The plaintiffs, through an ex parte motion filed on July 5, sought six interim reliefs, including an order restraining the APC from substituting its validly nominated candidates through a June 29 correspondence to INEC, or any subsequent communication, pending determination of the substantive suit.

They also asked the court to compel the APC to transmit to INEC the names of candidates validly nominated during primaries monitored by the commission.

When the matter first came up on July 8, the court declined to grant the interim application immediately, directing the APC and INEC to appear and respond before any ruling. The matter was adjourned to July 16.

At Thursday’s proceedings, counsel for the APC and INEC were in court, while the plaintiffs were represented by Ndarani and his legal team.

Ruling on the application, Justice Ekwo held that since issues had been joined by the parties — particularly with INEC now before the court the defendants were bound by law to preserve the subject matter of the litigation pending determination of the suit. When plaintiffs’ counsel urged the court to caution the APC and INEC against any action affecting the disputed list of candidates, the judge said it was “not a matter of advice but of law,” stressing that the defendants were bound to maintain the status quo.

The court accordingly 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 filing and exchanging their respective processes, and held that there was no procedural or jurisdictional impediment to an expeditious determination of the case. It directed that the matter be heard without further delay.

In furtherance of preserving and safeguarding the judicial process, the court ordered all parties to maintain the status quo pending final determination of the suit, restraining any act capable of prejudicing the rights of the parties or rendering the proceedings nugatory. It further directed that INEC be served forthwith with the originating and all consequential processes.

The effect of the subsisting order is that INEC is restrained from tampering with the existing list of candidates and from receiving, recognising, or acting on any purported substituted list of National Assembly candidates from Benue State submitted by the APC.