APGA Sues ISIEC to Halt Imo Local Government Elections Over Defective Notice and Voters’ Register

The All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) has approached the High Court of Imo State seeking to halt the September 26, 2026 local government elections, alleging that the process initiated by the Imo State Independent Electoral Commission (ISIEC) contains statutory defects relating to the Notice of Election, electoral timetable and Register of Voters.

The suit, filed at the Owerri Judicial Division as Suit No. HOW/1380/2026, was instituted by APGA alongside 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.

The defendants are the Imo State Independent Electoral Commission, the Chairman of ISIEC and the Attorney-General of Imo State.

The legal action comes days before the election scheduled to produce chairmen for the 27 local government areas and councillors for the state’s 305 wards across 4,758 polling units.

ISIEC announced on September 11 that the election would be held on Saturday, September 26, linking the exercise to a 360-day Notice of Election issued in September 2025.

In its Originating Summons, APGA is asking the court to determine whether ISIEC complied with the Constitution, the Electoral Act 2026 and applicable state electoral legislation before fixing and proceeding with the election.

The plaintiffs cited, 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 legislation governing ISIEC.

A central part of APGA’s case concerns an instrument dated September 18, 2025, which ISIEC described 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 for the offices of chairmen and councillors in the 27 local government areas of Imo State ahead of the 2026 council elections.

However, APGA contends that the instrument did not specify the actual date appointed for the election.

The party is therefore asking the court to determine whether an electoral notice that 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 election date determines the operation of other statutory timelines governing the electoral process.

They further argue that ISIEC only announced the specific election date on September 11, 2026, when it issued another instrument or press release fixing Saturday, September 26, for the poll — approximately 15 days before the election.

APGA wants the court to determine whether the 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.

The party maintains that the September 11 announcement cannot retrospectively insert an election date into an instrument that had operated for almost a year without one.

It is also asking the court to determine whether the September 18, 2025 notice and the September 11, 2026 announcement, considered separately or together, constitute a valid statutory Notice of Election for the September 26 poll.

Another major issue raised by APGA is the change in Nigeria’s electoral legislation between the issuance of the initial notice and the scheduled election.

The September 2025 notice was purportedly issued pursuant to the Electoral Act 2022. APGA said the 2022 law was subsequently repealed by the Electoral Act 2026, which came into force on February 18, 2026.

The plaintiffs do not contend that every electoral step taken under the repealed legislation automatically became ineffective when the new law came into force.

Rather, they argue that ISIEC must demonstrate that the continuing electoral process complies with mandatory requirements 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 Federal Capital Territory Area Council elections relevant to local government elections conducted by State Independent Electoral Commissions and provides consequences for failure to comply with the prescribed procedure.

The party is consequently asking the court to determine whether the September 26 election can lawfully proceed without compliance with the statutory safeguards it has identified.

APGA has also challenged the process relating to the Register of Voters to be used for the election.

In the affidavit supporting the Originating Summons, Engr. Udensi Samuel Iheanyi, the party’s State Organising Secretary, said APGA has members across the 27 local government areas and 305 wards and intends to sponsor candidates and participate fully in the election.

He said the party 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.

They said they had not been provided with satisfactory documentary evidence showing when voter registration, updating and revision of the Register of Voters were concluded.

They also claim that they have not been furnished with the certified Register of Voters that ISIEC intends to use for the election.

APGA is therefore asking the High Court to determine whether ISIEC can lawfully conduct the election without establishing compliance with 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, APGA is asking the court to order ISIEC and its chairman to produce documents underpinning the election.

The documents sought 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; subsequent notices, circulars, press releases or guidelines relating to the election; the certified Register of Voters proposed for use; and documents establishing when 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 finds that failure to state an election date amounted to non-compliance with a mandatory requirement.

They are also seeking a declaration that the September 11, 2026 announcement cannot retrospectively cure or validate an earlier defective notice, alongside declarations concerning the alleged failure to establish compliance with requirements relating to the voters’ register.

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 is seeking 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.

APGA is also seeking immediate relief before the substantive Originating Summons is determined.

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 election 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 supporting affidavit, APGA argues that the suit raises substantial legal questions that warrant preserving 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 that could subsequently be 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 ultimately determines that an interlocutory injunction was wrongly granted.

APGA has additionally asked the court to abridge the period available to the defendants to respond to the application because of the proximity of the election.

The party said it was not seeking to deny the defendants a hearing but wanted their responses filed within a shortened period to enable the interlocutory application to be determined before September 26.

The application is scheduled for hearing on Wednesday, September 23, 2026, three days before the election.

The dispute has also extended beyond the courtroom.

On September 18, APGA’s lawyers, Fidelis Asika Ilobi & Co., 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 interlocutory injunction application remains pending.

The lawyers said the Originating Summons and Motion on Notice had 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., arguing 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, proceeding with the September 26 election while the court is scheduled 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 the letter.

They urged the Attorney-General, as the state’s Chief Law Officer and a named defendant in the suit, 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 law firm, however, stated that the letter was not intended to pre-empt the decision of the High Court but to prevent the pending proceedings from being overtaken by events.

APGA is also relying 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 statutory preconditions governing the electoral process had not been shown to have been satisfied. The apex court restored the Federal High Court judgment addressing, among other issues, compliance with requirements relating to the voters’ register and electoral process.

APGA argues that the Rivers decision demonstrates the mandatory nature of statutory safeguards governing local government elections and contends that the same principles should guide the High Court’s consideration of the Imo election process.

The party is therefore asking the court to determine whether an electoral commission created by statute can proceed with an election where mandatory statutory requirements governing the process are alleged not to have been satisfied.

The High Court has yet to determine the merits of APGA’s allegations, and the documents supplied do not show that any restraining order has been issued against ISIEC.

Consequently, the September 26 election has not been judicially stopped at this stage.

What is currently before the court is APGA’s application for an interlocutory injunction, which is scheduled for hearing on September 23.

ISIEC’s publicly announced position remains that elections for the 27 local government chairmanship seats and 305 councillorship positions will hold on September 26, 2026.