APC Primaries: Ekiti Rep challenges result, demands enforcement of electoral law

Hon. Kolawole Akinlayo, a member of Nigeria's House of Representatives, has formally challenged the outcome of the All Progressives Congress (APC) primary election for the Ekiti North Federal Constituency II. Akinlayo urged the party leadership to strictly enforce Section 88(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026, in addressing the dispute. The lawmaker, representing Moba/Ilejemeje/Ido Osi Federal Constituency, submitted a petition to the APC National Chairman and the National Assembly Appeal Committee. He alleges that the aspirant declared the winner, Mr. Kunle Ibrahim, was ineligible to contest because he held a political appointment as a Special Assistant in the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF). Akinlayo claims Ibrahim continued to receive his salary until May 2026, after the primary election, violating the Electoral Act which bars political appointees from contesting primaries or serving as delegates without prior resignation. He stressed that adherence to the Electoral Act and the APC Constitution is crucial for the integrity of the party's internal democratic processes ahead of the 2027 general elections. Akinlayo asserted that Ibrahim's participation was legally void from the beginning, citing the Supreme Court's Tukur v. Mustapha (2023) judgment, which affirmed that political appointees must resign before participating in party primaries. Beyond eligibility concerns, Akinlayo also alleged widespread irregularities in the primary, including a lack of voter accreditation, vote inflation, voter suppression, and disruptions in areas where he claims strong support. He further accused the party of appointing officials with vested interests as returning officers, compromising the exercise's credibility. Akinlayo called for Ibrahim's disqualification and for him to be declared the rightful winner, or alternatively, for the annulment of results from affected wards and a fresh primary involving only qualified aspirants.

“

The purported winner was not qualified to participate in the primary election by virtue of Section 88(1), and his participation is, in the eyes of the law, a nullity ab initio.