By ENITAN ABEL JOHNGOLD ORHERUATA, mnipr
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is facing mounting pressure to explain the legal and documentary basis for clearing former Deputy Senate President, Senator Ovie Omo-Agege, as the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) candidate for Delta Central Senatorial District in the 2027 general elections.
The demand for answers follows the September 24, 2026 judgment of the Supreme Court restoring key provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 dealing with political party membership registers and the nomination of candidates.
In an open letter to the INEC Chairman, Abuja, public affairs commentator and political writer Fegor Ogene asked the electoral commission to disclose, within the limits of the law, how it scrutinised Omo-Agege’s party membership history, NDC membership record, waiver and nomination documents before publishing his name among the candidates for the 2027 election.
The request comes amid questions over the sequence of Omo-Agege’s political movements in 2026 — from his participation in the All Progressives Congress (APC) senatorial primary to his subsequent departure from the party and emergence as the NDC’s candidate.
Ogene, however, was careful to stress that his intervention was not an allegation that Omo-Agege is disqualified, nor a claim that the Supreme Court ordered his removal from the 2027 race.
Rather, he wants INEC to demonstrate how the law was applied to the facts and documents surrounding the nomination.
THE BIG QUESTION: WHAT DOES INEC’S FILE SHOW?
At the centre of the controversy is the documentary trail.
Omo-Agege contested the APC Delta Central senatorial primary on May 18, 2026, but lost the party’s ticket to Senator Ede Dafinone.
He subsequently left the APC and emerged as the NDC candidate for the same senatorial district.
Reports of his resignation from the APC place the date on May 22, 2026 — four days after the APC primary.
That chronology is significant because Omo-Agege’s membership status at the time of the APC primary, and the precise point at which he became a member of the NDC, could be relevant to questions surrounding the statutory requirements for party nomination.
Ogene is therefore challenging INEC to go beyond political claims and establish the facts from its records.
What date did the resignation take effect?
What date was it received by the APC?
What was Omo-Agege’s membership status on May 18?
When exactly did his NDC membership commence?
When was his name entered on the NDC membership register submitted to INEC?
And perhaps most importantly:
What documentary evidence did INEC rely upon when it accepted his NDC nomination?
SUPREME COURT RULING PUTS MEMBERSHIP REGISTERS BACK IN SPOTLIGHT
The questions have acquired greater significance following the Supreme Court’s September 24 judgment restoring Sections 77(5), 77(6), 77(7) and 84(2) of the Electoral Act 2026.
The provisions address, among other matters, political party membership registers and the statutory framework governing participation in party nomination exercises.
The Supreme Court’s decision did not specifically name Omo-Agege or order his disqualification.
But Ogene argues that the judgment makes it legitimate to ask how INEC applied the restored provisions when assessing nominations for the 2027 election.
According to him, the judgment cannot automatically validate every nomination submitted to the Commission.
The facts and documents relating to each candidate must still be considered against the applicable law.
That, he argues, is precisely why INEC should explain the basis for its decision.
WHERE IS THE ORIGINAL NDC REGISTER?
One of the most important questions raised in the letter concerns the NDC membership register.
Omo-Agege has maintained that his name appeared on the NDC membership register submitted to INEC within the relevant period.
If that claim is supported by the original register held by INEC, Ogene argues, the document should settle a substantial part of the controversy.
But if the claim is not supported by the Commission’s records, the public deserves to know that as well.
Ogene has therefore asked INEC to confirm:
- when the NDC submitted the relevant membership register;
- whether Omo-Agege’s name appeared on the original register;
- what membership date was recorded against his name;
- whether the register was submitted within the statutory period; and
- whether INEC independently verified the membership record before accepting the nomination.
The issue, he insists, should be determined by documents — not by statements from political camps.
WHAT ABOUT THE NDC WAIVER?
Another potentially contentious issue is the waiver reportedly granted to Omo-Agege by the NDC.
Ogene wants INEC to clarify the nature and legal effect of the waiver.
Was it merely an internal party waiver dealing with a requirement under the NDC’s constitution or guidelines?
Or was it relied upon in relation to a statutory requirement imposed by the Electoral Act?
The distinction, he argues, is critical.
A political party may have authority to waive certain internal requirements where its rules and the law permit it. But a party’s internal decision cannot, by itself, override a mandatory statutory requirement.
Ogene is therefore asking INEC to explain whether the waiver was examined and what legal weight the Commission attached to it.
‘A NAME ON THE LIST IS NOT THE END OF THE STORY’
The publication of the final candidates list has not ended the questions.
INEC’s list includes Omo-Agege as the NDC candidate for Delta Central and Dafinone as the APC candidate.
But Ogene argues that administrative publication should not be confused with a judicial determination that every conceivable question surrounding a candidate’s nomination has been finally settled.
He wants INEC to state whether it specifically examined Omo-Agege’s membership register, his membership date, the NDC waiver, his nomination documents and the chronology of his departure from the APC.
If the Commission conducted those checks and found the nomination compliant, he argues, there should be no difficulty explaining the documentary and legal basis of the decision.
If there are unresolved issues, he wants the appropriate procedures followed.
NO SPECIAL TREATMENT, SAYS PETITIONER
Ogene also sought to remove the controversy from the realm of partisan politics.
He said the issue should not be about whether Omo-Agege or Dafinone is the more popular candidate.
Nor, he argued, should questions concerning one candidate be used as a political weapon against another.
The fundamental issue, according to him, is whether the same law is being applied to every candidate.
“If questions arise concerning Senator Dafinone’s nomination, his case should be assessed on the evidence and applicable law. If questions arise concerning Senator Omo-Agege’s nomination, the same approach must apply,” the letter stated in substance.
INEC ASKED TO ANSWER 10 KEY QUESTIONS
The petition has effectively placed ten major issues before the electoral commission:
1. APC resignation: What is the documentary evidence establishing the date Omo-Agege left the APC?
2. APC primary: What was his membership status when he participated in the May 18 primary?
3. NDC register: When did the NDC submit the relevant membership register?
4. Membership entry: Was Omo-Agege’s name on the original register?
5. Membership date: What date was recorded for his NDC membership?
6. Verification: How did INEC determine that his membership satisfied the applicable statutory requirements?
7. Waiver: What did the NDC waiver cover and how did INEC treat it?
8. Nomination: Did the NDC’s nomination process comply with the Electoral Act?
9. Supreme Court judgment: Did INEC review the nomination after the September 24 judgment?
10. Current status: Is any administrative review or relevant legal proceeding concerning the nomination pending?
THE POLITICAL STAKES ARE HIGH
The controversy comes at a politically sensitive moment for Delta Central, where the battle for the 2027 senatorial seat is already shaping up as a major contest.
Omo-Agege is a former Deputy Senate President and a prominent political figure in Delta State. Dafinone, who secured the APC ticket after defeating Omo-Agege in the party primary, is also seeking to retain the seat for the ruling party.
The emergence of Omo-Agege under the NDC banner has consequently added another layer to an already closely watched political contest.
But the latest questions are not about campaign popularity.
They are about the paper trail behind the candidacy.
INEC’S SILENCE COULD KEEP THE CONTROVERSY ALIVE
The easiest way to resolve the controversy, Ogene argues, is for INEC to explain what its records show.
If Omo-Agege’s name was properly contained in the relevant NDC register, the Commission can say so.
If the membership date complied with the applicable law, it can explain how.
If the waiver was lawful and limited to an internal party requirement, INEC can clarify that.
If the nomination documents satisfied the Electoral Act, the Commission can state the basis for its conclusion.
But if there are discrepancies in the records, those discrepancies should also be addressed through the appropriate legal and administrative processes.
The larger issue, Ogene argues, is public confidence.
The 2027 election cannot afford a situation in which competing political camps interpret electoral law according to partisan advantage while the public is left guessing about what the official records actually contain.
THE QUESTION NOW BEFORE INEC
The Supreme Court has restored the relevant provisions.
Omo-Agege has asserted that he was properly registered with the NDC.
INEC has published his name as a candidate.
The remaining question is whether the Commission will now open the documentary record sufficiently to explain why.
For Ogene, that is not a demand for Omo-Agege’s disqualification.
It is a demand for transparency.
And with the 2027 elections approaching, the question before INEC is increasingly difficult to avoid:
What exactly did the Commission find when it examined Omo-Agege’s membership, resignation, waiver and nomination records — and on what legal basis did it clear him to contest under the NDC?
Until that question is answered, the controversy is unlikely to disappear.
