Five Kano State candidates of the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) have asked the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to resist pressure from a party faction and abide by court decisions upholding two of their candidatures.
In a petition sent to the INEC Chairman through the state Resident Electoral Commissioner, the candidates also urged the commission to protect its staff from intimidation and handle disputes over the party’s primaries strictly according to the law.
NEWSNGR reports that the petitioners are Abdulmajid Umar (Gwale), Shaaban Sharada (Kano Municipal), Ismaeel Sani (Kumbotso), Ibrahim Bango (Sumaila/Takai) and Nasir Ahmed (Nasarawa).
The petition, signed by their lawyer, Bola Aidi (SAN), responded to an October 16, 2026, complaint reportedly filed by Tahir Chambers on behalf of the Kano chapter of the NDC against INEC official Hauwa Buhari.
Buhari was accused of issuing several conflicting, undated reports on the monitoring of the party’s primaries.
The candidates alleged that some state-chapter officials, having lost out in the nomination process, turned to protests, petitions, and media campaigns to discredit them.
Aidi stated that his clients bought nomination forms, were screened and cleared, and participated in the party’s primaries as required.
He noted that the NDC’s national leadership had approached the Federal High Court, Abuja, in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1628/2026, seeking an order compelling INEC to upload the names of its candidates, and that the court granted an interim order in that regard.
The lawyer further disclosed that the Federal High Court in Kano, in judgments delivered on October 14, 2026, affirmed two of the five as the party’s candidates.
He insisted that INEC must comply with the rulings unless a competent court stays, varies or sets them aside.
Aidi described the position of those claiming to speak for the Kano chapter as curious, as they were now fighting the same candidates the party had gone to court to protect.
“It is therefore remarkable that persons purporting to act for the Kano State Chapter of the same political party now seek to discredit the candidature of persons whose recognition and uploading the party itself had previously sought through judicial proceedings,” he said.
He also raised concerns that the protests staged in Kano and Abuja after the rulings were capable of intimidating judges handling the remaining cases.
The petition, however, made it clear that the candidates did not oppose peaceful protests.
“Our clients do not seek to prevent any person from exercising the constitutional right to peaceful assembly, lawful protest or petition. Their concern is directed strictly at any unlawful conduct or intimidation that may accompany or underlie such activities,” it said.
Defending the INEC official, Aidi said she could be investigated, but the process must be fair and evidence-based, adding that inconsistencies in documents did not automatically make the reports favouring his clients fake.
“While no official of INEC is above legitimate scrutiny or investigation, the Commission must be careful not to permit its disciplinary and administrative mechanisms to become instruments of political persecution,” he warned.
He relied on Sections 158(1) and 287(3) of the Constitution, which guarantee INEC’s independence and require compliance with Federal High Court judgments.
The lawyer also said his clients had reported alleged threats and interference with judicial processes to the police.
The candidates asked the commission to preserve all original records relating to the primaries, including monitoring reports, correspondence and electronic data.
They further urged INEC to remain neutral and refrain from taking any administrative step that could affect the pending cases.
Aidi cautioned that yielding to orchestrated pressure would set a bad precedent for the electoral system.
“It would constitute a dangerous precedent if persons dissatisfied with the outcome of party primaries or judicial proceedings could, through orchestrated protests, social media campaigns and petitions against electoral officials, secure administrative outcomes contrary to the documented nomination processes or subsisting judicial decisions,” he said.
