Peter Obi's Ally Sues Kwankwaso Over Kano NDC Primaries

A significant pre-election dispute has emerged in Kano State, where Shuaibu Abubakar, an ally of Peter Obi and a former Labour Party candidate, along with four other aggrieved aspirants, has initiated a lawsuit against the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) and its national leader, Rabiu Kwankwaso. The plaintiffs are challenging the legitimacy of the NDC's primary elections held on May 28, 2026, across Kano State, alleging widespread non-compliance with the Electoral Act 2026, the NDC constitution, and party guidelines. The suit, filed at the Federal High Court, seeks to nullify the entire primaries and restrain the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising any candidates that emerged from the contested exercise, raising critical questions about internal party democracy and the integrity of candidate selection processes ahead of the 2027 general elections.

The landscape of Nigerian pre-election litigation has once again been stirred by a high-profile lawsuit challenging the outcome of party primaries. This time, the focus is on the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) in Kano State, where an ally of presidential hopeful Peter Obi, Shuaibu Abubakar, has joined forces with other aggrieved aspirants to sue the party and its national leader, Rabiu Kwankwaso. The lawsuit, filed at the Federal High Court, seeks to invalidate the NDC's primary elections conducted on May 28, 2026, citing alleged irregularities and non-compliance with electoral laws and party guidelines.

This development underscores the persistent challenges faced by political parties in upholding internal democracy and the critical role of the judiciary in resolving pre-election disputes. The involvement of prominent political figures like Peter Obi (who is now the NDC presidential candidate) and Rabiu Kwankwaso (the NDC vice-presidential candidate) elevates the stakes, drawing national attention to the integrity of the candidate selection process. For legal practitioners, the case presents a fresh opportunity to examine the evolving jurisprudence on locus standi, the scope of judicial intervention in internal party affairs, and the strictures of the Electoral Act in ensuring credible elections.

The core of the dispute revolves around allegations of a flawed primary election process, including the denial of nomination forms and a lack of transparency in the conduct of the primaries. The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for the NDC's preparations for the 2027 general elections, potentially reshaping its candidate list in Kano State and setting precedents for future intra-party conflicts.

The legal framework governing primary elections in Nigeria is primarily enshrined in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) and the Electoral Act, which, at the time of these primaries, appears to be the Electoral Act 2026, building upon the provisions of the Electoral Act 2022. These statutes mandate political parties to conduct transparent, free, and fair primaries for the nomination of candidates for elective offices. Section 84 of the Electoral Act outlines the procedures for direct, indirect, and consensus primaries, emphasizing adherence to party constitutions and guidelines.

Pre-election matters, such as challenges to primary election outcomes, fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal High Court, as stipulated by Section 285(14)(a) of the Constitution. A fundamental principle in such cases is that of *locus standi*, which dictates who has the legal right to bring an action before the court. Judicial authorities, including the Supreme Court, have consistently held that only an aspirant who participated in the primary election can challenge its outcome. This principle aims to prevent busybodies or rival political parties from interfering in the internal affairs of another party. The courts have affirmed that a political party is not allowed to sue another political party to challenge the nomination of the latter party's candidates.

Historically, challenges to primary elections have been a recurring feature of Nigeria's electoral cycle, often leading to protracted legal battles that sometimes extend beyond the general elections. The Electoral Act 2022, and presumably its 2026 iteration, sought to strengthen internal party democracy and streamline the resolution of these disputes by providing clear guidelines and timelines. However, as the current lawsuit demonstrates, issues surrounding compliance with these provisions continue to be a fertile ground for litigation, particularly concerning allegations of candidate imposition and procedural irregularities.

The lawsuit initiated by Shuaibu Abubakar and four other aggrieved aspirants against the NDC and Rabiu Kwankwaso presents several critical points for legal analysis. The plaintiffs are challenging the NDC primaries held on May 28, 2026, alleging "widespread violations of the Electoral Act 2026, the NDC constitution, and the party's official guidelines." Specifically, they claim denial of access to nomination forms, which effectively shut them out of contesting for various positions, including governorship and legislative seats in Fagge, Tarauni, and Gwale constituencies. They also allege a lack of transparent accreditation of delegates, voting, vote counting, and collation.

A central legal hurdle for the plaintiffs will be establishing *locus standi*. While Shuaibu Abubakar was a Labour Party candidate in the 2023 elections, the current suit identifies him as an "ally of Peter Obi" (now NDC presidential candidate) and states he filed the lawsuit "alongside four other aggrieved aspirants of the NDC." This suggests he is acting as an aspirant of the NDC, which is crucial, as Nigerian jurisprudence firmly establishes that only an aspirant who participated in a primary election can challenge its outcome. If Abubakar is indeed an aspirant of the NDC for the Fagge Federal Constituency, his *locus standi* would be established. However, if his primary affiliation remains with the Labour Party while challenging NDC primaries, his standing could be questioned, given the Supreme Court's stance against one political party challenging the internal affairs of another.

The reliefs sought by the plaintiffs are far-reaching, including a declaration nullifying all NDC primaries in Kano State on May 28, an order setting aside the certificate issued to Aminu Suleiman as the party's flagbearer for Fagge Federal Constituency, and an injunction restraining INEC from recognising any candidates from the contested primaries. The Federal High Court has the power to nullify primaries where there is a clear non-compliance with the Electoral Act or party guidelines. Section 84(14) of the Electoral Act 2022 (and presumably 2026) empowers the court to hear complaints from aspirants regarding non-compliance. However, the courts generally refrain from interfering in the internal affairs of political parties unless there is a clear breach of statutory provisions or the party's own constitution and guidelines.

Another significant aspect is the allegation that the NDC unlawfully delegated the sale and distribution of its Expression of Interest and Nomination Forms to a single individual in Kano State, effectively gatekeeping the process. Such an action, if proven, would constitute a serious breach of the principles of internal democracy and equal opportunity for all aspirants, which are fundamental tenets of the Electoral Act. The case will likely hinge on the plaintiffs' ability to adduce concrete evidence of these alleged irregularities and non-compliance, as the burden of proof lies heavily on them. The court will scrutinise whether the NDC's actions violated mandatory provisions of the Electoral Act or its own constitution, rather than mere procedural lapses. The mention of "Electoral Act 2026" in the context of the alleged violations suggests that the legal framework for the 2027 elections is already in place or being referenced by the parties.

The lawsuit challenging the NDC primaries in Kano State highlights the enduring complexities of internal party democracy and the critical role of judicial oversight in Nigeria's electoral process. For legal practitioners, this case serves as a timely reminder of the stringent requirements for conducting valid primary elections under the Electoral Act 2026 and the established principles of *locus standi* in pre-election matters. The Federal High Court's decision will undoubtedly shape the NDC's political trajectory in Kano and could influence the broader landscape of candidate selection for the 2027 general elections.

Practitioners should closely monitor the court's interpretation of the Electoral Act 2026 concerning party compliance and the scope of judicial intervention. The outcome will be particularly instructive on how courts balance party autonomy with the imperative of ensuring free, fair, and transparent internal processes. Political parties, in turn, are urged to meticulously adhere to their constitutions, guidelines, and the Electoral Act to minimise litigation risks and foster genuine internal democracy, thereby strengthening the credibility of Nigeria's electoral system.