The governorship candidate of the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) in Kano State, Aminu Gwarzo, has accused the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) of questionable conduct after his name and that of his running mate were omitted from the list of candidates for the forthcoming governorship election.
Gwarzo alleged that the electoral commission failed to provide a convincing explanation for the omission, raising concerns about transparency and the fairness of the electoral process ahead of the 2027 general elections.
Speaking during an interview on Arise News, the NDC candidate said INEC published its list of governorship candidates on October 10, 2026, but excluded both him and his running mate despite the party’s position that it had fulfilled the requirements for participation in the election.
According to Gwarzo, he emerged as the party’s consensus candidate in Kano State and did not encounter any significant objection or complication regarding his nomination before the list was released.
He said the party subsequently approached INEC to seek clarification but was dissatisfied with the response it received.
The controversy deepened after the NDC candidate said he learnt that some individuals had approached the Kano State High Court to challenge his candidacy and were seeking an interim order to prevent INEC from publishing his name.
Gwarzo questioned why his name and that of his running mate were already missing from the October 10 list when, according to his account, the court proceedings came later.
He stated that the case was filed on October 17, while the court issued an order on October 27 directing INEC not to publish their names as governorship candidates.
The sequence of events, he argued, raised questions about the circumstances surrounding the initial omission and whether the commission had acted before receiving a court order restricting publication.
“There appears to be an understanding behind the scenes between INEC and people with other interests,” Gwarzo alleged, expressing suspicion about the commission’s handling of the matter.
He maintained that the NDC had met the necessary nomination requirements and insisted that political parties and candidates deserved clear explanations whenever electoral authorities took decisions affecting their participation in an election.
The dispute places renewed attention on the responsibility of INEC to administer elections transparently, comply with applicable court orders and communicate its decisions clearly to political parties.
However, Gwarzo’s allegations do not, on their own, establish collusion between the commission and his political opponents. The circumstances surrounding the omission, the legal basis of the court proceedings and INEC’s explanation will be essential to determining whether the commission acted properly.
The court order also introduces a significant legal dimension to the dispute. The precise terms of the order, the parties bound by it and any subsequent proceedings will matter in establishing the current status of the NDC candidate’s nomination.
For the party, the immediate challenge is to clarify its legal position and pursue any available remedies through the appropriate judicial and electoral channels. For INEC, the controversy presents an opportunity to explain the basis of its decision and address concerns about the administration of the candidate list.
As preparations for the next general elections continue, disputes over nominations and candidate eligibility could become increasingly consequential. Transparent procedures and timely explanations will be critical to preventing avoidable controversies from undermining public confidence in the electoral process.
Gwarzo has continued to question the commission’s conduct, insisting that the omission of his name and that of his running mate requires a satisfactory explanation.
INEC’s response and the outcome of the court proceedings are expected to be central to determining the next stage of the dispute.
