Judiciary symbol
Justice James Omotosho, in a judgment, held that the plaintiff’s claim lacked merit and the suit had become academic.
The plaintiff, Chief Mrs. Chinasa Nwekeke, had filed the suit as the protem National Chairman and on behalf of Wisdom Party, a political association seeking a registration as a party.
Nwekeke, in the originating summons marked: FHC//ABJ/CS/746/2026 filed on April 14 by her lawyer, Mark Agbo, had sued INEC as sole defendant.
The plaintiff sought a declaration that the political association, “Wisdom Party,” to which INEC did not object to its name, symbol, and logo after the expiration of 90 days via its letter of intent on Sept. 22.
She sought a declaration that the establishment of INEC’s Fund pursuant to Section 3 (1) & (2) of the Electoral Act, 2022 upon which the totality of the expenditure of the commission is charged; and Section 75(6) of the Electoral Act, 2022 which empowered INEC at its discretion to fix an administrative fee as a precondition processing an application for registration of a political party is unreasonable, unwarranted, unjustified and inconsistent with section 4 (1) of the Electoral Act, 2022.
She sought a declaration that the failure of INEC in responding to the letter of intent of the plaintiff was deemed to be a no objection to the name, symbol and acronym of the plaintiff’s association.
She also sought a declaration that the provision of Section 75 (6) of the Electoral Act, 2022 which provides for a separate source of funds in the form of fee or levy on political associations for the performance of the constitutional function of registration of political parties is inconsistent with Section 4 (1) (f) of the Electoral Act, 2022 and thus should be struck down by the court.
Nwekeke further submitted that INEC’s failure in providing its account details to the plaintiff’s association for payment of administrative fee was deemed to be a waiver and that it was meant to frustrate the application of the plaintiff’s association.
She therefore prayed the court for an order directing the defendant to accept from the plaintiff s association its application for registration as a political party.
Besides, she sought a declaration that the application submitted pursuant to the relief above was proper.
INEC, through its lawyer, Segun Bello, disagreed with the plaintiff’s submissions.
The electoral umpire, in its counter affidavit, stated that the plaintiff’s letter of intent did not have a symbol of the party and that the general election is fixed for January 2027 which means that the court, granting the reliefs of the plaintiff, means that it would be required to file a formal application letter and it would be less than 12 months to the general election.
The commission also submitted that the letter of intent written by the plaintiff’s association did not meet the requirements of the law as it did not contain the symbol of the proposed political party and thus it is void.
It argued that since there was no valid letter of intent, the plaintiff’s association had no right to claim reliefs.
INEC, therefore, urged the court to refuse the reliefs sought.
Delivering the judgment, Justice Omotosho observed that from a cursory look at Section 3, especially Section 3 (2)(c), aids, grants or any other accruals is quite open-ended.
“An accrual in accounting terms refer to revenues and expenses.
“This means that revenues generated by the defendant can be paid into the Independent National Electoral Commission Fund.
“The administrative fee being debated by the plaintiff is meant for the registration of political parties and being a revenue accruing to the defendant it can rightly be paid into the Fund.
“Importantly, this also implies that the defendant is within its powers to demand for administrative or processing fees such as fees for production and certification of national voters register.
“The fact that an institution receives funding from the Federation Account does not mean that it cannot generate funds or charge fees for some of its activities.
“For instance, the judiciary receives funding from the Consolidated Revenue Fund, however courts still fix filing fees and processing fees for court processes.
“There is no express prohibition on the defendant to refrain from fixing administrative fees.
“Consequently, I hold that the defendant has powers to fix administrative fees for the purpose of registration of political parties.
“In final analysis, the claim of the plaintiff is without merit and the suit has become academic.
Consequently, the suit is hereby dismissed,” the judge ruled.
