Gombe 2027: Court Judgments Strengthened Pantami’s PDP Candidacy — Lawyer

Gombe 2027: Court Judgments Strengthened Pantami’s PDP Candidacy — Lawyer

A leading North‑East legal practitioner and former Chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Gombe State, Barrister Ahmed Tukur, has said the recent Federal High Court judgment on the Gombe PDP pre‑election dispute has placed Professor Isa Ali Ibrahim Pantami in one of the strongest legal positions ahead of the 2027 general elections. According to him, the ruling delivered three major judicial protections rarely secured together in a single pre‑election judgment: a judicial confirmation of party membership, a complete nullification of the earlier primary, and validation of a fresh, INEC‑monitored direct primary held on 29 September 2026.

Tukur explained that the court did more than assume Pantami’s membership of the PDP—it judicially affirmed it. The Certified True Copy (CTC) of the judgment expressly held that Pantami’s name is validly captured in the PDP membership register submitted to INEC. He said this finding carries far‑reaching consequences under the Electoral Act 2026, noting that Section 77(5) requires that only persons on the party register can vote or be voted for, and the court found Pantami meets this requirement. Under Section 77(6), only INEC’s CTC of the register is admissible, and the court relied on CTC No. INEC/ABJ/REG/CTC/GM/2026/114, dated 2 September 2026, Page 114, Entry 2055. Tukur added that the finding now operates as estoppel per rem judicatam under Section 173 of the Evidence Act, meaning Pantami’s membership can no longer be challenged.

He noted that while many candidates face membership disputes up to the Supreme Court, Pantami now has a judicial seal that forecloses that line of attack.

Tukur also highlighted that the Federal High Court nullified the PDP primary held on 26 May 2026 for procedural non‑compliance with Section 84 of the Electoral Act. Citing Supreme Court precedents such as Amaechi v. INEC (2008) and PDP v. Ezeonwuka (2018), he said the legal effect is clear: a nullified primary is deemed never to have existed. He explained that the May 26 exercise is void ab initio and cannot form the basis of any legal challenge. Under Section 285(9) of the Constitution, the 14‑day window to challenge a primary runs from 29 September 2026, not May 26. Compliance with Sections 77 and 84 is therefore assessed only as at September 29, the date of the fresh primary. He added that the court ordered a fresh primary—not disqualification—consistent with Ararume v. INEC (2007) and Section 88(3) of the Electoral Act.

Following the court’s order, the PDP conducted a fresh direct primary on 29 September 2026, monitored by INEC. Pantami won with 2,054 votes, defeating his closest rival who scored 389. Tukur said this fresh primary is legally significant because of the Supreme Court’s decision in INEC v. Zenith Labour Party (2026), which restored Sections 77 and 84(2) as valid law, making indirect primaries impermissible. He explained that the INEC CTC register used was submitted more than 30 days before the primary, satisfying Section 77(2) and (6). The primary was direct and INEC‑monitored, fulfilling Section 84(2) and (13). Pantami’s name was submitted and published under Sections 29 and 32, making INEC functus officio—it cannot delete his name administratively. Even if any breach were proven, the remedy under Section 88(3) is non‑inclusion, not substitution. Courts cannot declare a runner‑up winner over a candidate who scored 2,054 votes, consistent with Faleke v. INEC (2016).

Tukur also addressed concerns that INEC might rely on the Zenith Labour Party (ZLP) judgment to delete Pantami’s name. He referenced the legal propositions of Dr. M. O. Ubani, SAN, noting that the ZLP judgment restored the law but does not automatically disqualify Pantami, who complied with the restored provisions on September 29. He added that Pantami was not a party to the ZLP case, and excluding him without fair hearing would violate Section 36 of the Constitution. After publication under Section 32, only a court—not INEC—can exclude a candidate under Section 88(3).

Tukur concluded that Pantami enters the general election with three major protections: judicial confirmation of PDP membership, nullification of the defective May primary, and a fresh, valid, INEC‑monitored direct primary victory. He described this combination as “as close to impregnable as a candidate can get” in pre‑election law. The 14‑day window to challenge the fresh primary expired on 13 October 2026.

By PRNigeria