Legal Validity of the ADC Convention: Implications of INEC’s Absence

By Chinenye Nwaogu, Esq.

A clear starting point: the mere absence of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) at a political party’s convention does not automatically invalidate the exercise. The legal effect depends on the nature of the convention, compliance with statutory notice requirements, and whether the outcome affects candidate nomination or internal party governance.

1. Statutory Framework

Section 82(1) of the Electoral Act 2022 mandates that every political party must give INEC at least 21 days’ notice of any convention, congress, or meeting convened to elect members of its executive committees or nominate candidates. Section 82(5) further provides that INEC may monitor such proceedings.

The operative word here is “may,” not “shall,” meaning INEC’s presence is discretionary, not mandatory.

Implication:

Failure to notify INEC constitutes a statutory breach and exposes the outcome to legal challenge. However, INEC’s absence where proper notice has been given does not invalidate the proceedings.

2. Judicial Position / Case Law

The Supreme Court of Nigeria has consistently drawn a distinction between internal party affairs and statutory compliance:

In PDP v. Sylva, the Court held that internal party disputes are largely non-justiciable unless there is a breach of statutory provisions.

In Lado v. CPC, it was established that failure to comply with mandatory provisions of the Electoral Act such as notice to INEC—can invalidate the process.

In APC v. Marafa, the Court emphasized that non-compliance with statutory requirements in party processes can have far-reaching consequences, including nullification of outcomes linked to those processes.

3. The Crucial Distinction

If the ADC convention was purely administrative or internal such as ratifying leadership or setting policy courts are likely to treat it as an internal affair. In such cases, INEC’s absence is legally inconsequential.

However, if the convention involved the election of party executives or candidate nomination:

Proof of proper notice to INEC becomes critical.

INEC’s absence after due notice  proceedings remain valid.

No notice to INEC  proceedings are legally vulnerable and may be set aside upon challenge.

4. Constitutional Context

Section 223 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 requires political parties to operate democratically, particularly in the selection of leadership. Courts often rely on this provision, alongside the Electoral Act, to scrutinize conventions where procedural irregularities are alleged.

5. Points to Ponder

If the African Democratic Congress (ADC) can demonstrate compliance with Section 82 especially proper notice INEC’s absence is immaterial.

If notice is disputed or defective, the convention’s outcomes particularly leadership decisions may be successfully challenged in court.

Any nominations arising from a defective convention risk invalidation, consistent with the reasoning in APC v. Marafa.

Conclusion

INEC’s absence, on its own, does not invalidate the ADC convention. The decisive legal question is whether statutory notice and procedural requirements were fulfilled.

Where compliance is established, the convention stands; where it is not, the outcomes remain open to judicial nullification if challenged.