SDP disowns suit against INEC’s 2027 election timetable, says ex-National Secretary acted without party approval.

By Our Correspondent

The Social Democratic Party (SDP) has distanced itself from a lawsuit challenging the timetable released by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), alleging that the action was instituted without the approval or authorization of the party by its former National Secretary, Dr.

Olu Agunloye.
In a statement made available to newsmen in Abuja on Wednesday, the party described the development as an act of impunity and a breach of due process, insisting that Agunloye lacked the lawful authority to institute legal proceedings on behalf of the party.
The SDP stated that the suit, which sought to challenge aspects of the electoral timetable ahead of the 2027 General Elections, was filed solely on the initiative of Agunloye and did not represent the position of the party or any of its constitutionally recognized organs.
According to the party, documents and correspondence exchanged between Agunloye and the legal practitioner engaged for the litigation indicated that the former National Secretary independently retained legal services and initiated the suit without any mandate from the party leadership.
The SDP further alleged that the correspondence showed the legal action was undertaken based on personal instructions reportedly issued by Agunloye, rather than any decision of the National Working Committee (NWC), National Executive Committee (NEC), or any other competent organ of the party.
Among the documents cited by the party is a letter written by Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Shaibu Enejo Aruwa, in which the lawyer referred to conversations and messages allegedly exchanged with Agunloye concerning the institution of the suit against INEC and other parties.
The party argued that the contents of the correspondence contradicted claims that the litigation had been properly authorized, maintaining that no resolution or directive was issued empowering Agunloye to commence legal proceedings in the party’s name.
Party officials expressed concern that the suit could create unnecessary distractions and potentially affect preparations for the 2027 General Elections, warning that unauthorized actions taken in the name of the party could undermine its internal processes and public image.
“The lawsuit was neither discussed nor approved by the appropriate organs of the party. It was a unilateral action taken without the knowledge, consent, or authorization of the SDP,” the statement said.
The party therefore announced its complete dissociation from the suit, identified as FHC/ABJ/CS/720/2026, as well as all filings, representations, and actions connected to the matter.
It urged members of the public, political stakeholders, and relevant institutions to disregard any suggestion that the litigation reflected the official position of the SDP.
The party reaffirmed its commitment to the rule of law, internal democracy, and due process, stressing that only duly authorized officials and organs of the party could take decisions or initiate actions on its behalf.
The controversy comes amid heightened political activities and preparations by political parties for the 2027 General Elections, with the SDP insisting that its focus remains on strengthening its structures and complying with all lawful electoral processes.