The All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) has commenced legal proceedings before the High Court of Imo State seeking to halt the September 26, 2026 local government elections, contending that the process initiated by the Imo State Independent Electoral Commission (ISIEC) is affected by alleged statutory defects relating to the Notice of Election, electoral timetable and Register of Voters.
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/NBBSPIDEL.png")
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/2026-Summer-IDRI-Masterclass.jpg")
The action, filed at the Owerri Judicial Division as Suit No. HOW/1380/2026, was instituted by APGA; its Imo State Chairman, Hon. John C. Iwuala; State Organising Secretary, Engr. Udensi Samuel Iheanyi; State Secretary, Pastor Alphonsus Eberendu; and State Woman Leader, Hon. Mrs Nkasi Obi.
Joined as defendants are the Imo State Independent Electoral Commission, the Chairman of ISIEC and the Attorney-General of Imo State.
The suit comes days before the election scheduled to produce chairmen for the 27 local government areas of Imo State and councillors for the state’s 305 wards across 4,758 polling units. ISIEC announced on September 11 that the election would hold on Saturday, September 26, and linked the exercise to an earlier 360-day Notice of Election issued in September 2025.
In its Originating Summons, APGA is asking the court to determine a series of questions concerning whether ISIEC complied with the Constitution, the Electoral Act 2026 and applicable state electoral legislation before fixing and proceeding with the poll.
The plaintiffs invoked, among other provisions, Sections 7, 197 and 199 of the 1999 Constitution, relevant provisions of the Second Schedule to the Constitution, Sections 9, 28, 29, 32, 44, 152, 153 and 154 of the Electoral Act 2026, as well as applicable provisions governing ISIEC.
Central to APGA’s case is an instrument dated September 18, 2025, described by ISIEC as a “360 Days’ Notice of Election” and published in the Whitepaper newspaper.
The party acknowledges that the notice stated that elections would be conducted into the offices of chairmen and councillors in the 27 local government areas of Imo State ahead of the 2026 council elections. It, however, contends that the instrument did not specify the actual date appointed for the election.
APGA is consequently asking the court to determine whether an electoral notice which fails to state the date of the election can constitute a valid and effective statutory Notice of Election.
According to the plaintiffs, the omission is material because the date of an election determines the operation of other statutory timelines governing the electoral process.
They further contend that ISIEC only announced the specific date on September 11, 2026, when it issued another instrument or press release fixing Saturday, September 26, 2026 for the election — about 15 days before the poll.
The party wants the High Court to decide whether that subsequent announcement could legally cure, supplement or retrospectively validate the September 2025 notice if the earlier document is found to have omitted a mandatory statutory requirement.
APGA’s position is that the September 11 announcement cannot be used retrospectively to insert an election date into an instrument that had operated for almost a year without one.
The plaintiffs are also asking the court to determine whether the September 18, 2025 notice and the September 11, 2026 announcement, whether considered individually or together, amount to a valid statutory Notice of Election for the September 26 polls.
Another significant aspect of the challenge relates to the change in Nigeria’s electoral legislation between the issuance of the first notice and the scheduled election.
The September 2025 notice was purportedly issued pursuant to the Electoral Act 2022. APGA states that the 2022 legislation was subsequently repealed by the Electoral Act 2026, which commenced on February 18, 2026.
The plaintiffs do not argue that every electoral step taken under the repealed Act automatically ceased to have effect once the new legislation came into force. Rather, they contend that ISIEC must demonstrate that the continuing electoral process satisfies mandatory requirements applicable under the Electoral Act 2026.
Particular reliance is placed on Section 153 of the Electoral Act 2026, which APGA says makes the statutory procedure applicable to FCT Area Council elections relevant to local government elections conducted by State Independent Electoral Commissions and attaches consequences to a failure to comply with the prescribed procedure.
The party is therefore asking the court to determine whether the September 26 election can lawfully proceed without compliance with those statutory safeguards.
APGA has also raised questions concerning the Register of Voters intended to be used for the election.
In the affidavit supporting the originating summons, Engr. Udensi Samuel Iheanyi, APGA’s State Organising Secretary, said the party has members throughout the 27 local government areas and 305 wards and intends to sponsor candidates and participate fully in the election.
He said APGA has a direct interest in ensuring that any election in which it participates is conducted in accordance with constitutional and statutory requirements.
The plaintiffs calculate that the relevant 90-day period preceding the September 26 election fell on or about June 28, 2026, and say they have not been provided with satisfactory documentary evidence showing when voter registration, updating and revision of the Register of Voters were concluded.
They further claim that they have not been furnished with the certified Register of Voters ISIEC intends to use for the election.
APGA is consequently asking the High Court to determine whether ISIEC can lawfully conduct the election without establishing compliance with the statutory requirements governing the Register of Voters, including the cessation of registration, updating and revision within the prescribed period.
As part of its substantive reliefs, the party is asking the court to order ISIEC and its Chairman to produce the documents underpinning the election.
Those documents include the original or certified true copy of the September 18, 2025 Notice of Election; evidence of its publication in the relevant constituencies; the complete electoral timetable and schedule of activities; the September 11, 2026 announcement; any subsequent notices, circulars, press releases or guidelines relating to the election; the certified Register of Voters proposed for use; and documents establishing the date on which voter registration, updating and revision ceased.
The plaintiffs are seeking declarations that the September 18, 2025 notice is invalid and incapable of constituting a valid statutory Notice of Election if the court agrees that failure to state an election date amounted to non-compliance with a mandatory requirement.
They also seek a declaration that the September 11, 2026 announcement cannot retrospectively cure or validate an earlier defective notice, as well as declarations concerning the alleged failure to establish compliance with voters’ register requirements.
APGA further wants the court to nullify and set aside the challenged September 2025 and September 2026 instruments if they are found to contravene the Electoral Act 2026.
Ultimately, the party seeks a perpetual injunction restraining ISIEC and its Chairman, whether acting personally or through their officers, servants, agents, privies or other persons acting under their authority, from conducting, supervising, announcing, declaring, concluding or giving effect to the September 26 local government elections on the strength of the challenged notices.
But APGA is not waiting for determination of the substantive originating summons before seeking immediate relief.
The party has separately filed a Motion on Notice for interlocutory injunction, asking the High Court to temporarily restrain ISIEC and its Chairman from proceeding with the September 26 polls pending the hearing and determination of the substantive case.
The application was brought pursuant to Order 38 Rule 8 of the High Court of Imo State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2017, Section 6 of the Constitution and Section 25 of the High Court Law, among other enabling provisions.
In its affidavit supporting the motion, APGA argues that the suit raises substantial legal questions warranting preservation of the status quo until the court determines whether the electoral process complies with the law.
The party maintains that conducting the election before its application is determined could render the substantive proceedings nugatory or create a completed electoral process involving the announcement of results, expenditure of public funds, appointments and assumption of office.
It argues that damages would not adequately compensate for the alleged constitutional, statutory and institutional consequences of conducting an election subsequently found to have violated mandatory requirements.
The applicants also contend that the balance of convenience favours preserving the status quo and have undertaken to pay damages if the court eventually determines that an interlocutory injunction was wrongly granted.
APGA has additionally sought an abridgment of the period available to the defendants to respond to the application, citing the proximity of the election.
The party said it was not attempting to deny the defendants a hearing, but wanted their responses filed within a shortened period so that the interlocutory application could be determined before September 26.
The application is scheduled for hearing on Wednesday, September 23, 2026, just three days before the election.
The legal dispute has also moved beyond the courtroom.
On September 18, APGA’s lawyers, Fidelis Asika Ilobi & Co., formally wrote to the Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice of Imo State, drawing his attention to the pending suit and warning of what they described as the legal consequences of proceeding with the election while the application for interlocutory injunction is awaiting determination.
The lawyers said the Originating Summons and Motion on Notice had already been served on the Attorney-General, ISIEC and the other defendants as of September 17, meaning the authorities had notice of the pending proceedings.
They relied on the Supreme Court decision in Military Governor of Lagos State & Ors v. Chief Emeka Odumegwu Ojukwu & Anor. and argued that a party aware of pending proceedings seeking injunctive relief should not take steps capable of frustrating the subject matter of the litigation or presenting the court with a fait accompli.
According to the lawyers, going ahead with the September 26 election while the court is due to hear the injunction application on September 23 could expose the government and ISIEC to an allegation that they had attempted to overreach the judicial process.
“No person, however highly placed, and no authority of Government, can dare or treat with disdain the judicial powers of the High Court of Imo State,” the lawyers stated in their letter.
They consequently urged the Attorney-General, as the Chief Law Officer of the state and a named defendant, to advise the government and ISIEC to maintain the status quo and refrain from proceeding with the election until the court hears and determines the interlocutory application.
The firm was, however, careful to state that the letter was not intended to pre-empt the decision of the High Court, but rather to prevent the pending proceedings from being overtaken by events.
APGA is also relying significantly on the Supreme Court’s February 28, 2025 judgment concerning the Rivers State local government elections.
In that case, the Supreme Court nullified the October 5, 2024 Rivers council elections after finding that the statutory preconditions governing the electoral process had not been shown to have been satisfied. The apex court restored the Federal High Court judgment that had addressed, among other matters, compliance with requirements surrounding the voters’ register and the election process. (TheCable)
APGA argues that the Rivers decision demonstrates the mandatory character of statutory safeguards governing local government elections and contends that the same principles should inform the High Court’s consideration of the Imo process.
The party therefore wants the court to determine whether an electoral commission created by statute may proceed with an election where mandatory statutory requirements governing the process are alleged not to have been complied with.
The High Court has not yet determined the merits of APGA’s allegations, and the documents supplied do not show that any restraining order has presently been made against ISIEC.
Accordingly, the September 26 election has not been judicially stopped at this stage. What is presently before the court is APGA’s application asking for an interlocutory injunction, which is fixed for hearing on September 23.
ISIEC’s publicly announced position remains that elections into the 27 local government chairmanship seats and 305 councillorship positions will hold on September 26, 2026.
[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
Available now for NGN 40,000 at ASC Publications, 10, Boyle Street, Onikan, Lagos. Beside High Court, TBS. Email publications@ayindesanni.com or WhatsApp +2347056667384. Purchase Link: https://paystack.com/buy/evidence-act-complete-annotation
______________________________________________________________________ “Enhance Legal Practice With Authoritative Reports” — Alexander Payne Offers Comprehensive Law Reports, Spanning Over A Century Of Nigerian Jurisprudence
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
