2027: Pantami, Gwarzo in, Adebutu out

INEC made different decisions on three prominent governorship candidates. It cleared Isa Ali Pantami and Abdulsalam Gwarzo after reviewing petitions from candidates omitted from its initial list. It rejected Ladi Adebutu’s request for reconsideration. The decisions determine who can currently appear as a candidate, but court cases may still change the outcome.

Pantami, the PDP candidate in Gombe State, was cleared despite ongoing litigation. Gwarzo, the Nigeria Democratic Congress candidate in Kano State, was also cleared. However, INEC said both approvals depend on pending court cases. Adebutu, the PDP candidate in Ogun State, argued that he remained properly registered with his party and had met membership requirements, but his petition failed.

The immediate result is that Pantami and Gwarzo may contest, while Adebutu remains excluded from INEC’s list. INEC said it had no objection to Pantami or Gwarzo contesting. Their candidacies could still be affected if courts rule against them, and INEC planned to issue a formal statement on the review.

INEC is the Independent National Electoral Commission, Nigeria’s body for administering elections. Its role includes preparing candidate lists, checking whether parties and nominees meet electoral requirements, and clearing candidates to contest. These decisions matter because a candidate’s name must appear on the commission’s approved list before that person can formally contest under the process described in the article.

In this case, INEC published a list of governorship and House of Assembly candidates on October 10. It omitted some names because questions remained about party defections and membership-register submissions. The commission then gave affected candidates 14 days to submit petitions. After reviewing 69 petitions, it cleared some candidates, including Pantami and Gwarzo, while rejecting Adebutu’s request.

INEC’s authority is not absolute. The commission said Pantami’s and Gwarzo’s clearances were subject to pending court cases. Courts can therefore affect whether an already-cleared candidate remains eligible. INEC also planned to publish a formal statement explaining the review outcome.

The review involved 69 petitions from political parties concerning candidates omitted from the governorship and State House of Assembly lists. About 36 petitions were reported to have succeeded, while the remaining petitions failed. These figures show that INEC changed its position for many candidates, but not for everyone who challenged exclusion.

The petitions followed INEC’s 14-day review window. The commission released its initial list on October 10 and allowed omitted candidates to submit complaints until October 24. After receiving all the petitions, INEC held a meeting lasting more than six hours. A competent source said roughly 36 petitions were successful, although the source stressed that final figures were still awaited from the legal department.

The reported total therefore remained provisional at the time of the report. INEC had cleared prominent candidates such as Pantami and Gwarzo, but rejected Adebutu’s petition. The commission said it would issue a formal statement, which was expected to provide the authoritative breakdown of successful and unsuccessful cases.

INEC initially left some candidates off its approved list because it could not confirm that their nominations complied with electoral requirements. The concerns involved candidates who had previously contested under other parties before defecting to the parties that later nominated them. INEC also questioned whether those parties had submitted their membership registers as required.

The issue affected candidates such as Pantami and Gwarzo. The article says INEC attributed the omissions to alleged non-compliance with the Electoral Act, 2026, particularly its requirement that parties submit membership registers. The commission linked its position to a September 24, 2026, Supreme Court judgment affirming the constitutionality of Section 77(5) to (7).

INEC did not treat the first list as necessarily final. It opened a 14-day period for omitted candidates to petition for review. All affected candidates reportedly submitted petitions by October 24. After reviewing them, INEC cleared some candidates and rejected others, including Adebutu, while warning that pending court cases could still affect eligibility.

Pantami’s and Gwarzo’s INEC clearances are not final in practical terms because court cases concerning their candidacies remain pending. INEC expressly said their right to contest is subject to the outcomes of those cases. A ruling against either candidate could remove the legal basis for that person’s candidacy or require INEC to change its position.

Gwarzo had already gone to court over the omission of his name and that of his running mate, Rabiu Mustapha, from Kano’s governorship list. He asked the court to declare the exclusion unlawful and order INEC to recognise them as NDC candidates. Pantami’s candidacy was also being litigated, with a court proceeding expected on Friday.

For now, INEC said it had no objection to either candidate contesting. However, its source stressed that a court could rule otherwise. Their clearances therefore allow them to proceed for the moment, but do not guarantee that they will remain eligible through the election process. The courts’ final decisions will determine the lasting effect of INEC’s approvals.

A political party membership register is an official record showing who belongs to a political party. It can help establish whether a candidate is genuinely affiliated with the party that nominated them. In the article’s context, the register is part of the information INEC uses when checking whether party nominations meet legal requirements.

The requirement became central because INEC questioned whether some parties had submitted their membership registers before nominating candidates. The commission cited Section 77(5) to (7) of the Electoral Act, 2026, and said a September 24, 2026, Supreme Court judgment affirmed that submitting registers is mandatory. Candidates affected included people whose party changes or defections raised additional questions.

The register requirement can therefore affect whether INEC includes a candidate on its approved list. It does not mean every omission is permanent. INEC allowed petitions within 14 days and later cleared some candidates after review. The article does not detail the register’s format or every verification step, but it clearly presents submission as a legal condition for parties.

Political parties begin the process by nominating candidates and submitting the information needed for electoral review. They are also responsible for meeting legal requirements, including submitting membership registers. Candidates depend on their parties’ compliance, especially when questions arise about defections or whether a nominee belonged to the nominating party.

INEC then examines the nominations and publishes a list of candidates cleared to contest. It initially omitted some names, accepted petitions during a 14-day window, and later reviewed 69 petitions. It cleared Pantami and Gwarzo but rejected Adebutu’s petition. This shows INEC makes the administrative decision about who appears on the approved list.

Courts provide the final legal check when candidates challenge exclusions or when eligibility is disputed. Gwarzo asked a court to compel recognition of his candidacy, while Pantami’s case was also pending. INEC said its clearances could be affected by court outcomes. Responsibility is therefore shared, not held by one institution alone.