INEC Legally Bound By Oath And Supreme Court Verdict On Labour Party Leadership

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), having affirmed under oath in a counter-affidavit that Julius Abure’s tenure as National Chairman of the Labour Party expired in June 2024, is now legally estopped from claiming otherwise regarding his status.
This position is bolstered by the Supreme Court’s definitive judgment in SC/CV/56/2025 delivered on April 4, 2025, which upheld that internal party leadership disputes are non-justiciable – beyond the purview of courts and that no court has jurisdiction to affirm or recognize any party chairman under such circumstances.
In its unanimous verdict of April 4, the Supreme Court nullified the earlier Federal High Court and Court of Appeal decisions that had recognized Mr. Abure as Labour Party chairman (Those lower courts had, in October 2024 and January 2025 respectively, directed INEC to acknowledge Abure’s chairmanship) Justice Inyang Okoro, delivering the lead judgment, emphasized that a political party’s internal affairs lie outside judicial authority.
“The court must not have a say in every internal [activity] of a political party”, the apex court noted, except where expressly allowed by law or involving crimes or clear legal rights. Because the core of Abure’s case revolved around an internal leadership tussle, neither the trial court nor the appellate court had jurisdiction to entertain it.
Crucially, the Supreme Court reproached the Court of Appeal for overreaching its powers by pronouncing Abure as chairman. In the judgment’s words: “In the instant case, the court below… strayed beyond its jurisdiction… to pronounce Barrister Julius Abure as the National Chairman of the [party]. Their Lordships of the lower court were wrong to so do”. Accordingly, the apex court struck out all decisions that had purported to affirm Abure’s chairmanship, declaring: “Consequent upon the foregoing, the decisions of both trial court and the court below recognizing Barrister Julius Abure as the National Chairman of the 1st Respondent are hereby struck out for want of jurisdiction”. In other words, any judicial endorsement of Mr. Abure’s claim to the chairmanship has been voided by the Supreme Court for lack of authority.
INEC’s own sworn deposition aligns squarely with this outcome. In the Federal High Court proceedings last year, INEC categorically stated that Mr. Abure’s term as chairman lapsed in June 2024, refusing to recognize the party’s controversial March 2024 convention that purported to extend his tenure. By admitting under oath that his chairmanship had effectively ended, the Commission has taken a position it cannot later contradict. Legal experts note that under the doctrine of estoppel, a party is precluded from reneging on facts it affirmed in judicial affidavits. Thus, with the highest court’s ruling now reinforcing INEC’s stance, the Commission is bound to honor its affidavit’s content and cannot lawfully assert that Mr. Abure remains the Labour Party chairman beyond the said expiry.
The Supreme Court’s judgment not only settles the question of leadership in the Labour Party but also serves as guidance for all political parties. The court pointedly advised that party officials must adhere to their constitutions and respect term limits. “If the constitution of a political party has prescribed duration for tenure of an officer, such officer should be humble enough to leave at the expiration of the tenure,” the judgment admonished, in a remark widely seen as apropos to Mr. Abure’s situation. This unequivocal statement underlies the fact that Mr. Abure’s tenure having ended by the party’s rules, any attempt to hold on or to seek court validation of an expired mandate is improper.
INECS COUNTER AFFIDAVIT-Abure tenure
With this legal finality, all political actors and INEC are strongly cautioned against any actions or narratives that contradict the Supreme Court’s verdict and INEC’s sworn position. The combination of INEC’s deposition and the apex court’s judgment is final and binding, leaving no ambiguity in law as to who can lawfully lead the Labour Party at this point. Any deviation or refusal to comply with this outcome would be acting in defiance of a settled legal order.
SC On abure
Stakeholders are urged to respect the rule of law by abiding fully with the Supreme Court decision, as any attempt to act otherwise is null and void ab initio and could sow needless confusion. INEC, in particular, is expected to demonstrate impartiality and fidelity to the law by refraining from recognizing or dealing with anyone as Labour Party chairman contrary to the extant legal position.
The post INEC Legally Bound By Oath And Supreme Court Verdict On Labour Party Leadership appeared first on TheNigeriaLawyer.