Senate Passes Electoral Act Amendment Bill, Amended Clause Clarifies Where Aspirants Can File Pre-Election Cases
The Senate has passed the 2026 Electoral Act Amendment Bill, with the amended clause focused on clarifying the court jurisdiction for pre-election matters.
The bill seeks to address uncertainty, conflicting court decisions and delays in disputes arising from party primaries, nomination of candidates and other pre-election processes.
The passage followed the presentation of a report by the Senate Committee on Independent National Electoral Commission by its Chairman, Senator Simon Lalong, during plenary on Thursday.
Lalong said the amendment targets Section 29 of the Electoral Act and introduces a new Section 29A to provide a clearer judicial pathway for pre-election disputes.
A key provision is Clause Two of the bill, which amends Section 29(5) of the principal Act. The amended clause provides that an aspirant may file an action either in the Federal Capital Territory or in the jurisdiction where the cause of action arose.
According to Lalong, the amendment is practical and equitable because it reduces hardship on litigants, improves access to justice and aligns electoral litigation with the location where party primaries and nomination processes take place.
Table: Explanation of the Amended Clause
| Item | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Clause amended | Clause Two of the bill amends Section 29(5) of the Electoral Act. |
| Main subject | Jurisdiction of courts in pre-election matters filed by aspirants. |
| What the clause now provides | An aspirant may file a case either in the Federal Capital Territory or in the jurisdiction where the cause of action arose. |
| Meaning in simple terms | A political aspirant does not have to file only in one restricted location. The aspirant can approach the court in Abuja or the place linked to the dispute. |
| Type of dispute covered | Pre-election disputes, including matters linked to party primaries, nomination processes and candidate selection. |
| Reason for the amendment | To reduce confusion over which court should hear pre-election matters. |
| Expected benefit | Faster resolution of cases, better access to justice and fewer conflicting court decisions. |
| Problem it seeks to address | Forum shopping, multiple suits in different courts, delays and contradictory judgments. |
| Wider legal effect | It creates more certainty in electoral litigation and strengthens the pre-election dispute process. |
Lalong said the amendment became necessary because Nigeria’s legal system had continued to record conflicting interpretations on the proper court with jurisdiction over pre-election matters, despite the provisions of Section 285(14) of the 1999 Constitution.
He said the uncertainty had led to conflicting decisions from courts of coordinate jurisdiction, abuse of court processes and delays in the resolution of electoral disputes.
The proposed Section 29A also establishes a clear jurisdictional framework for pre-election matters relating to National Assembly, governorship and State House of Assembly elections. Under the proposal, such matters shall begin at the Federal High Court, with appeals going to the Court of Appeal.
For presidential and vice-presidential pre-election matters, the bill provides that cases shall begin at the Court of Appeal, exercising original jurisdiction, with appeals going to the Supreme Court.
Lalong said the provision was rooted in constitutional logic, judicial efficiency and the hierarchy of courts.
He explained that presidential elections are national in character and carry major constitutional significance. He said placing such matters before the Court of Appeal at first instance would support faster determination by a superior court with national competence.
He added that assigning other pre-election matters to the Federal High Court would promote consistency, especially because electoral administration in Nigeria falls within the federal structure through INEC.
Lalong said the bill also seeks to stop the practice of filing multiple suits in different judicial divisions in search of favourable orders.
According to him, such practices weaken public confidence in the judiciary and undermine electoral stability.
“By expressly providing that no court shall entertain pre-election matters except in accordance with the proposed Section 29A, this amendment introduces certainty and procedural discipline into electoral adjudication,” Lalong said.
He described the amendment as institutional, saying it would strengthen electoral justice, deepen democratic accountability and reinforce public confidence in the electoral process.
Senator Mohammed Monguno, who seconded the motion, said the amendment was necessary and would improve Nigeria’s electoral litigation process.
President of the Senate, Godswill Akpabio, commended the committee for its work after the bill was passed. He expressed confidence that President Bola Tinubu would assent to the bill, saying the amendment would deepen democracy and governance in Nigeria.
