Court Grants Substituted Service of Contempt Notice on INEC Chairman Over Disobedience to Judgment

Abuja, Nigeria – A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the substituted service of Form 48, a notice of contempt proceedings, on the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, for allegedly failing to comply with a valid court order. The directive was issued on Tuesday by Justice Obiora Egwuatu following an ex parte application brought by the National Rescue Mission (NRM).

The political party had approached the court to seek enforcement of a March 5, 2025 judgment, which mandated INEC to recognise the outcome of its emergency national convention held on January 17. The convention saw the emergence of a new leadership headed by Chief Edozie Njoku. The party argued that the leadership change was critical to correcting imbalances within its National Executive Committee (NEC).

Tinubu Defends New INEC Annex, Stresses Need For Institutional Dignity

Substituted Service Approved Amid INEC’s Alleged Non-Compliance

The NRM, represented by legal counsel Mr. Oladimeji Ekengba, accused INEC and its Chairman of deliberately ignoring the court’s judgment, despite being present in court during the ruling and being properly served with the Enrolled Order. According to Ekengba, INEC’s continued refusal to comply constitutes a violation of judicial authority and obstructs the party’s internal democratic processes.

Frustrated by failed attempts to deliver the contempt notice to Prof. Yakubu in person, the NRM requested substituted service. The party supported its motion with an affidavit deposed to by Mr. Adebayo Wasiu, stating that due to INEC’s layered security arrangements, it was nearly impossible to reach the Chairman directly.

“The INEC Chairman is shielded by layers of protocol, and the Commission only accepts court processes at a designated registry at its gate,” the affidavit read, highlighting the practical challenges faced during service attempts.

Court Sides with NRM, Orders Service via INEC Officials

After considering the application and supporting documents, Justice Egwuatu granted the NRM’s request. He ruled that the contempt notice, known as Form 48, could be served through substituted means by handing the document to any INEC official at the commission’s headquarters located at Plot 430, Zambezi Crescent, Maitama, Abuja.

“The substituted service is to be effected by handing the process to any INEC official at its headquarters,” the judge pronounced. He further instructed the applicant to file an affidavit of service detailing the identity of the official who received the document to ensure procedural compliance.

The case has been adjourned to July 15, 2025, for mention, during which the court is expected to review the status of service and determine subsequent steps in the contempt proceedings.

Background: A Battle for Party Recognition

The legal face-off stems from INEC’s alleged refusal to recognise the leadership outcome of the NRM’s emergency convention. The party insists that the restructured leadership, headed by Chief Edozie Njoku, reflects the will of its members and is critical for the party’s operational revival and participation in upcoming political activities.

The March 5 judgment, which affirmed the validity of the January convention, was supposed to clear the path for the party’s new executive to be officially acknowledged by the electoral umpire. However, INEC’s silence and inaction have led the NRM to allege deliberate defiance of a binding judicial order.

Legal analysts say that if the court finds INEC or its Chairman in contempt, the implications could range from judicial sanctions to more serious legal consequences for disobeying the rule of law.

Rising Tensions Between Political Parties and INEC

This case adds to a growing list of disputes between INEC and political parties regarding the commission’s recognition of internal party decisions. It also raises fresh concerns about the enforceability of court orders involving powerful public institutions.

Observers note that while INEC has often cited procedural requirements for party recognition, the current matter revolves around the execution of a clear and direct court ruling—one which leaves little room for administrative discretion.

As the next court date approaches, political watchers and legal experts will be paying close attention to whether the commission will respond to the contempt charge or continue to maintain its silence. Either way, the outcome may set a precedent for how electoral bodies respond to judicial mandates in the future.