Pantami and the Electoral Act: Why the Membership Register Matters
By Adamu Hussaini
I had not intended to join the ongoing debate surrounding Professor Isa Ali Pantami’s participation in the forthcoming Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) governorship primary in Gombe State. However, as someone who supports his aspiration and believes public discussions should be anchored on facts rather than assumptions, I consider it necessary to offer a legal perspective.
At the outset, I agree that compliance with the Electoral Act is not optional. Every political party and aspirant must operate within the framework of the law.
Section 77 of the Electoral Act 2026 is central to the current debate. Specifically, Section 77(4) requires every political party to submit its membership register to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) not later than 21 days before the date fixed for its primaries, congresses or conventions. Sections 77(5) and 77(6) further regulate participation in party primaries based on the membership register submitted to INEC.
However, it is important to distinguish between what the law expressly requires and what some commentators have inferred. The Act requires the submission of the party’s membership register within the stipulated period. It does not expressly create a separate requirement that an aspirant must personally have been a party member for at least 21 days before the primary.
The critical legal question, therefore, is whether the aspirant’s name appears in the membership register validly submitted to INEC within the statutory timeline.
Read Also:
In Professor Pantami’s case, it has been publicly stated that he became a PDP member on 19 May 2026. Following the Federal High Court’s judgment of 24 September 2026, which nullified the earlier process that produced him as the PDP governorship candidate and ordered the party to conduct a fresh primary, the party is expected to organise another primary in compliance with the court’s directives.
Accordingly, the issue should not be reduced to a broad assertion that Professor Pantami is automatically disqualified because of an alleged “21-day membership rule.” Rather, the relevant factual and legal questions are whether the PDP complied with the Electoral Act in submitting its membership register to INEC and whether Professor Pantami’s name appears in the register applicable to the fresh primary.
For a primary scheduled for 29 September 2026, the statutory 21-day period would ordinarily fall on 8 September 2026. The pertinent question therefore becomes: Was Professor Pantami’s name contained in the PDP membership register submitted to INEC by the statutory deadline for that primary?
That question can only be answered by reference to the official membership register submitted to INEC and other relevant party records—not by speculation or political argument.
I support Professor Pantami’s participation in the fresh primary because I believe every aspirant should be judged according to the applicable law, authentic party records, relevant court decisions and verifiable facts. Eligibility should neither be assumed nor denied on the basis of interpretations that go beyond what the law expressly provides.
Public debate is healthy in a democracy, but it is most valuable when it is guided by evidence rather than conjecture. Where questions of eligibility arise, the appropriate approach is to examine the Electoral Act, the party’s constitution and guidelines, the membership register before INEC and the decisions of competent courts.
That, ultimately, is how the rule of law is preserved.
Dr. Adamu Hussaini, PhD writes from Gombe State
