The Certified True Copy (CTC) of the judgment of the Supreme Court of Nigeria delivered on September 24, 2026, has provided further clarity on the controversy surrounding the candidacy of Rt. Hon. O.K. Chinda.
A review of the CTC shows that the Supreme Court did not make any order disqualifying, removing, or invalidating the candidacy of Rep. Ogundu Kingsley Chinda, MHR
The appeal, marked SC/CV/495/2026, arose from the Court of Appeal judgment delivered on July 16, 2026, concerning the constitutionality of Sections 77(5)–(7) and 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026, as well as the relevant INEC timetable.
In its judgment, the Supreme Court allowed INEC’s appeal and set aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal.
No Order Against Chinda:
Significantly, there is no order in the CTC disqualifying Rt. Hon. O.K. Chinda or declaring his nomination invalid.
The judgment concerns the constitutional validity of specified provisions of the Electoral Act and the INEC timetable. It does not contain a candidate-specific determination against Chinda.
The CTC and What Some Lawyers Had Earlier Said:
The contents of the CTC also give context to the position earlier expressed by some lawyers, including Barr. Godspower Egbule, who had argued that the Supreme Court judgment should not be interpreted as affecting the candidacy of O.K. Chinda.
However, Lawyers like Deji Adeyanju, Liborous Oshomah, Chimenem Worlu & Sogbeyi Eli had argued that OK Chinda was disqualified by the Supreme Court judgment. They also called on INEC to disqualify candidates affected by the judgment.
The CTC now makes the relief granted by the Supreme Court clear: the Court restored the disputed provisions, set aside the Court of Appeal’s decision and restored the trial court’s judgment. There is no order in the judgment disqualifying OK Chinda or any other candidate.
What the Supreme Court Actually Decided
The Supreme Court’s decision dealt principally with:
* Section 77(5) of the Electoral Act 2026;
* Section 77(6) of the Electoral Act 2026;
* Section 77(7) of the Electoral Act 2026;
* Section 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026; and
* the relevant INEC Revised Timetable and Schedule of Activities for the 2027 General Election.
The apex court found that the Court of Appeal was wrong to declare the provisions unconstitutional and therefore restored them. Reports of the judgment confirm that the provisions relate principally to political party membership registers and the procedure for nomination of candidates.
About The Author
