Abuja, July 16, 2026— The Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to maintain the status quo in the dispute over the party’s candidates emerging from the Benue State APC primaries for the 2027 General Election.
The order was made on Thursday by Hon. Justice I.E. Ekwo during proceedings in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1429/2026, filed by aggrieved APC candidates from Benue State against the APC and INEC.
The plaintiffs had, through an ex parte motion filed on July 5, 2026, sought six interim reliefs, including an order restraining the APC from substituting its validly nominated candidates in Benue State through its June 29, 2026 correspondence or any subsequent communication to INEC, pending the determination of the substantive suit.
They also sought an order compelling the APC to immediately transmit to INEC the names of candidates validly nominated during the primaries monitored by the electoral commission.
When the matter first came up on July 8, 2026, the court declined to grant the interim application immediately, directing both APC and INEC to appear and respond before any decision was taken. The matter was consequently adjourned to July 16.
At Thursday’s proceedings, counsel representing the APC and INEC were present in court, while the plaintiffs were represented by Mohamad Ndarani, SAN, alongside his legal team.
In his ruling, Justice Ekwo held that since issues had been joined by the parties, particularly with INEC now before the court, the defendants were required by law to preserve the subject matter of the litigation pending the determination of the substantive suit.
When counsel to the plaintiffs urged the court to advise APC and INEC against taking any further action that could affect the disputed list of candidates, the judge responded that it was “not a matter of advice but of law,” stressing that the defendants were bound to maintain the status quo.
The court consequently restrained APC and INEC from taking any action capable of altering the disputed list of candidates pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit. The defendants did not object to the restraining order.
The matter was adjourned to Tuesday, July 21, 2026, for further proceedings.
