JamzNG Latest News, Gist, Entertainment in Nigeria
The Federal High Court in Abuja has set November 2, 2026, to rule in a case challenging the emergence of Donald Duke as the presidential candidate of the Peoples Redemption Party for the 2027 general elections.
Justice Mohammed Umar reserved the matter for judgment on Tuesday after lawyers representing the parties adopted their written submissions.
Abdullahi Muhammad appeared for the plaintiff, while Noah Abdul represented Duke. Azubuike Ogochukwu appeared for the Independent National Electoral Commission.
The case was brought by Yakubu Kingsley, who participated in the PRP presidential nomination process and is trying to reverse Duke’s emergence as the party’s nominee.
Kingsley named the People’s Redemption Party, Duke and INEC as the first, second and third defendants respectively.
The lawsuit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1234/2026, challenges the primary elections conducted by the PRP on May 25, the result of which was announced the following day.
Plaintiff questions Duke’s party affiliation
Kingsley said Duke was not a duly registered PRP member when the party submitted its membership register to INEC on 4 May.
He asked the court to determine whether Duke could validly participate in the presidential primary under such circumstances.
The plaintiff further alleged that the former governor of Cross River State failed to physically present himself for screening at the PRP national secretariat as required by the party’s guidelines.
Kingsley is then seeking a declaration that Duke should not have been allowed to participate in the primary election.
He also alleged over-voting in the results recorded in Bauchi, Gombe and Kwara states and asked the court to annul the affected results.
The aspirant wants the court to declare him PRP’s presidential candidate, arguing that he was a registered member and complied with the party’s nomination requirements.
He also sought an order directing INEC to stop recognizing Duke as the party’s presidential flagbearer and instead accept his own nomination.
In an affidavit supporting the case, Kingsley identified himself as a member of the PRP from Auchi III ward in Etsako West Local Government Area of Edo State.
He said he paid ₦20 million for the party’s expression of interest and presidential nomination forms.
Jurisdiction of the Duke and PRP Challenge Court
Duke and the PRP have lodged a preliminary objection asking the Federal High Court to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction.
Their lawyer, Noah Abdul, argued that the lawsuit was a pre-election matter and should have been filed within 14 days of contesting the event.
According to the defendants, the legal action arose on May 26, when the primary result was declared, but the case was only closed on June 11.
They argued that dismissing the case 17 days after the result was announced placed it outside the period permitted by Section 285(9) of the 1999 Constitution.
Reports describe the subpoena dated June 10, while the defendants say the action was formally filed on June 11. It is expected that the court will determine the legal effect of the filing date when it issues its ruling.
Abdul also argued that matters regarding political party membership were internal party affairs over which the court had no jurisdiction.
He argued that the matter could not be resolved normally by the judiciary.
INEC maintains a neutral position
INEC told the court that its officials only monitored the PRP presidential primaries in accordance with the electoral law.
The election commission said its representatives did not accredit the delegates, supervise the vote, collect the ballots or declare the winner.
According to INEC, these powers fell exclusively to the electoral committee appointed by the PRP.
The commission said it could not independently add or remove the results of any district, local government area or state during a political party’s primary.
INEC argued that it was bound to act on the name validly submitted by a political party unless a competent court made an order to the contrary.
The commission also said it had no personal interest in Duke or Kingsley emerging as PRP candidates and remained neutral in the controversy.
Judge Umar is expected to determine both the defendants’ jurisdictional objection and the substantive challenge to Duke’s appointment when sentencing is delivered on November 2.
Until then, allegations regarding party affiliation, screening and excessive voting remain claims before the court and have not been judicially determined.
