TD Abuja, FCT — A fresh dispute has erupted between the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) over the publication of candidate names for various constituencies ahead of the 2027 general elections.
The NDC has accused INEC of uploading and publishing the names of 10 individuals who, according to the party, were neither authorised nor nominated by it as candidates for seats in the Anambra State House of Assembly.
The party said the disputed names were particularly significant because Anambra is the home state of its presidential candidate, Peter Obi.
In a statement, the NDC alleged that the affected names were “unknown to the party” and were not among the candidates it submitted to the electoral commission in accordance with the law.
The party described the development as unacceptable and demanded an explanation from INEC on how the names came to be published as its candidates.
INEC Rejects Allegation
INEC, however, has strongly rejected the allegation, describing the NDC’s claims as “unfounded.”
In a statement issued on September 1, 2026, by Mohammed Kudu Haruna, Chairman of the Commission’s Information and Voter Education Committee, INEC said candidate nomination was legally the responsibility of political parties and that the commission had no authority to select, insert or substitute candidates for any party.
“INEC has no legal authority to select, insert, or substitute a candidate for any party,” the commission said.
It added that its monitoring of party primaries was a statutory oversight function and did not give it the power to impose candidates.
INEC said that ahead of the 2027 elections, all 22 registered political parties designated two technically trained officers to manage their nomination processes after receiving training organised by the commission.
According to the electoral body, portal access codes were subsequently issued directly to the National Chairmen of the respective parties, rather than through proxies.
INEC further said candidate lists were generated from information submitted by the parties through Form EC9 series (A-G) and jointly signed by the National Chairmen and National Secretaries.
The commission consequently dismissed suggestions that it independently uploaded or altered candidate information.
‘INEC Has EC9E Forms’
INEC went further, saying it was in possession of Form EC9E containing the names of the disputed candidates.
“As a matter of fact, the Commission has in its possession, Form EC9E where these candidates were listed and submitted to the Commission duly signed by the National Chairman and the National Secretary of the party,” Haruna said.
The commission reiterated its commitment to transparency, accountability and a level playing field for all participants in the electoral process.
NDC Demands Electronic Audit
The NDC, however, has refused to accept INEC’s explanation.
In a subsequent statement titled “NDC Insists: INEC Must Explain Source of EC9E Forms for Smuggled Anambra Candidates,” the party categorically denied submitting the EC9E forms relating to the 10 disputed candidates.
The party challenged INEC to explain precisely how it obtained the documents if, as the NDC maintains, they were never submitted by the party.
“The Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) wishes to categorically state that it did not submit the EC9E forms of the 10 published Anambra candidates to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC),” the party said.
The NDC said it had submitted the names of 10 candidates through the appeal process on the INEC portal, but alleged that those submissions were rejected.
It therefore questioned how the electoral commission could possess credentials and nomination forms for individuals whom the party says it did not submit.
Party Calls for Portal Audit
The opposition party is now calling for an electronic audit trail of INEC’s nomination portal to establish how the disputed candidates’ information entered the system.
According to the NDC, such an audit should reveal who uploaded the information, when it was uploaded, the account used and any subsequent modifications made to the records.
The demand has effectively shifted the dispute from a political accusation to a question of digital records, nomination documentation and the integrity of the electronic candidate-submission process.
The competing positions leave a central question unresolved: if the NDC did not submit the disputed EC9E forms, as it insists, who submitted them to INEC and through whose authorised access?
Conversely, INEC’s position is that the forms in its possession were duly submitted and signed by the party’s National Chairman and National Secretary.
The controversy could therefore ultimately turn on the documentary evidence and the electronic audit trail maintained on INEC’s candidate-nomination portal.
The dispute comes as political parties prepare for the 2027 elections, placing renewed attention on the transparency and integrity of the candidate-nomination process.
