A legal practitioner, Ejime Okolie, has taken the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and 19 political parties to the Federal High Court in Abuja, challenging what he describes as excessive expression of interest and nomination fees imposed on aspirants.

In the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/04/2026, Okolie filed the case on his own behalf and in the interest of millions of Nigerians who wish to participate in the electoral process. Among the respondents are INEC, the Attorney General of the Federation, and major political parties including the All Progressives Congress (APC), Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), and African Democratic Congress (ADC).

The plaintiff is asking the court to compel INEC to issue binding regulations that would set reasonable maximum limits for nomination and expression of interest fees. He is also seeking an order restraining political parties from fixing or enforcing fees for the 2027 general election primaries that could prevent qualified Nigerians from contesting. Additionally, he wants any relief granted to apply prospectively in order to safeguard constitutional rights ahead of future elections.

Okolie argued that the high cost of nomination forms before the 2023 general elections effectively shut out many qualified Nigerians, including himself, from participating in party primaries. He maintained that the practice infringes on his right to freedom of association as guaranteed under Section 40 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

He further contended that imposing steep financial requirements amounts to discrimination under Section 42 of the Constitution, as it disproportionately excludes ordinary citizens from political participation.

In his eleven grounds of argument, Okolie said the case was instituted in the public interest to protect Nigerians’ constitutional right to political engagement. He stated that his net income for 2025 was less than N2.4 million and noted that many professionals and young people earn even less.

According to him, prior to the 2023 primaries, political parties charged non-refundable fees ranging from millions to tens of millions of naira. He cited examples, noting that the APC pegged its presidential form at N100 million, governorship at N50 million, Senate at N20 million, House of Representatives at N10 million, and state assembly at N2 million.

Similarly, he said the PDP charged N5 million for its presidential expression of interest form and N35 million for nomination; governorship aspirants paid N1 million for EOI and N20 million for nomination; Senate aspirants paid N500,000 and N3 million; House of Representatives aspirants paid N500,000 and N2 million; while state assembly aspirants paid N100,000 for EOI and N500,000 for nomination. He added that other parties such as APGA and SDP also imposed fees running into millions of naira.

Okolie argued that these charges lack statutory backing from INEC, which regulates elections and sets campaign finance limits under the Electoral Act, 2022. He maintained that constitutional provisions outlining qualifications for elective offices—Sections 65, 106, 131, and 177—do not include financial capability as a requirement. He added that while political parties are recognised under Sections 222 to 229 of the Constitution, they must operate within constitutional boundaries.

Although the political parties are yet to file their responses, INEC, in a preliminary objection dated January 28, urged the court to dismiss the suit for lack of jurisdiction.

INEC’s counsel, Sulayman Ibrahim, SAN, argued that Okolie lacks the legal standing (locus standi) to institute the action. He further submitted that issues relating to nomination and expression of interest fees are internal matters of political parties and are therefore outside the court’s purview.

However, in his reply on points of law, Okolie described INEC’s objection as misplaced and inconsistent with established principles in public interest and fundamental rights litigation.

He argued that under the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules 2009, the requirement for locus standi is relaxed, particularly in public interest cases. Citing the Preamble, Paragraph 3(e) of the Rules, he noted that courts are mandated to encourage and welcome public interest litigation in the enforcement of fundamental rights.

On the argument that nomination fees fall within the internal affairs of political parties, Okolie maintained that party autonomy is not absolute and must give way where constitutional rights are threatened. He also contended that jurisdiction is determined by the claimant’s case, not by the defence.

Describing INEC’s objection as technical and lacking substance, he urged the court to dismiss it and proceed to hear the substantive application.

Justice Binta Nyako has fixed February 12 for hearing of the matter.