The Rivers State chapter of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) has questioned the eligibility of the All Progressives Congress (APC) governorship candidate, Kingsley Ogundu Chinda, following a recent Supreme Court judgment concerning political party membership registers and electoral procedures.
The ADC’s position centres on Sections 77(5) and 77(6) of the Electoral Act, which concern the submission of verified party membership registers to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) ahead of party primaries.
The Supreme Court judgment, delivered on September 24, 2026, has prompted debate over how the statutory requirements apply to candidates whose party membership and nomination timelines are being questioned.
ADC Raises Eligibility Questions
The Rivers ADC chapter argues that the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Electoral Act has implications for Chinda’s candidacy in the 2027 governorship election.
The party has called attention to the requirement that political parties submit verified membership registers to INEC at least 21 days before conducting their primaries.
The dispute raises questions about the timing of party membership, the submission of membership records and whether the relevant statutory requirements were met in Chinda’s case.
The ADC’s position is an allegation about eligibility, not a final judicial determination that the APC candidate has been disqualified.
APC Rejects Claims Against Its Candidate
The controversy follows an earlier rejection by the Rivers APC of reports that the Supreme Court had nullified Chinda’s governorship candidacy.
The APC’s state publicity secretary, Chibuike Ikenga, maintained that the party’s candidate remained qualified and that the Supreme Court judgment on membership registers did not invalidate his nomination.
The contrasting positions underscore the difference between a party’s interpretation of a judgment and a binding court order specifically determining a candidate’s eligibility.
Electoral Act Requirements
The relevant provisions of the Electoral Act address party membership records and their submission to INEC before primary elections.
Compliance with such requirements can become significant when disputes arise over whether a candidate was a valid member of a party at the relevant time or whether the party fulfilled its statutory obligations.
The application of the law to a specific candidate depends on the judgment’s precise terms, the relevant dates and the facts established in any proceedings.
The full judgment and any subsequent court orders are therefore important to determining the legal implications for Chinda’s candidacy.
Legal Questions Ahead of 2027
The dispute illustrates how judicial interpretations of electoral law can affect preparations for upcoming elections.
For now, the ADC has questioned Chinda’s eligibility, while the APC has defended its candidate’s status.
A definitive resolution would require the relevant legal questions to be determined through the appropriate judicial process rather than through competing political statements.