MUSLIM RIGHTS CONCERN (MURIC)* هيئة حقوق المسلمين Motto: Dialogue, Not Violence 13th October, 2026 TEXT OF THE PRESS CONFERENCE ON THE ARBITRARY OMISSION OF PROFESSOR ALI ISA PANTAMI'S NAME FROM THE GOMBE GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATES' LIST HELD AT THE HEADQUARTERS OF THE MUSLIM RIGHTS CONCERN (MURIC), LAGOS ON TUESDAY, 13TH OCTOBER 2026 PROLEGOMENA (INTRODUCTION): Imams and scholars, Members of the Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC), Greatest Muricians! Gentlmen of the Press, As-salaam Alaikunm. I welcome you all to this press conference. As you are aware, our great country, Nigeria, is in the twilight of preparations for the 2027 general elections which is slated to kick off on 16th  January, 2027. Preparations are already in full gear and everything is being done to ensure peaceful, free, fair and credible general elections. We have convened this press conference because we see that something has gone wrong and it needs to be addressed. No election can be credible when candidates are being disallowed from contesting for no just cause. But before we go on, it is necessary to put our narrative in its proper perspective ab initio to avoid wrong interpretations. Our organization, the Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC), is not affiliated to any political party. We are categorically non-partisan. As an Islamic human rights group, our interest lies in the protection, promotion and projection of Allah-given fundamental rights of Nigerian Muslims. As far as the Nigerian political landscape is concerned, our interest is not the political party or parties but the Muslim candidates and the Muslim electorate. To this end and to confirm our claim, we supported the candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Osun State during the gubernatorial election held in August 2026 because the state governor had been unfair to Muslims in the state (citizenscompassngr.com/muric…). It is therefore clear that we are for all political parties in so far as Muslims populate all political parties. BACKGROUND TO THE PANTAMI PHENOMENON: Professor Isa Ali Pantami was the only governorship aspirant of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Gombe State as at May 2026. He was given a voice affirmation as a sole aspirant on May 26, 2026. The voice vote was presided over by the PDP electoral committee chairman for Gombe State, Gregory Yenlong. This initial primary was later nullified by a Federal High Court, leading to a fresh primary election on September 29, 2026. The fresh primary election was duely conducted and Pantami still emerged winner with a wide margin scoring 2,054 votes to defeat Khamisu Mailantarki and Aliyu Garry, who polled 389 and 112 votes respectively in the direct primary. It is noteworthy that INEC monitored the PDP's fresh primary election won by Pantami. INEC team at the historic event was led by Mr. Gambo Umar Arabi. This team leader signed and submitted an official report. So what is INEC now telling us? On what ground is INEC disowning a process it was part of? The presence of INEC at the PDP primary election which produced Pantami proves beyond any reasonable doubt that both Pantami and his party went through due process. INEC UNFAIRLY, UNJUSTLY AND ILLEGALLY LEFT OUT PANTAMI'S NAME: Contrary to all expectations, however, the Independent National Electoral commission (INEC) came out of the blues to omit Professor Pantami's name from the list of guber candidates in Gombe State. But why would INEC still go ahead to remove Professor Pantami's name from the list of Gombe gubernatorial candidates after a court of competent jurisdiction had ruled that a new primary election should be held and it was so held. From that moment the product of that election becomes a bona fide candidate. From this standpoint, INEC's action against Pantami must be seen as deliberate and premeditated. The removal of Pantami's name constitutes a ...

AHMED RAJI & CO. BARRISTERS | SOLICITORS | ARBITRATORS | CONSULTANCY 12th October, 2026 The Chairman, Independent National Electoral Commission, (INEC) Plot 436, Zambezi Crescent, Maitama, Abuja. Sir, UNLAWFUL AND UNEXPLAINED OMISSION OF THE NAME OF PROFESSOR ISA ALI IBRAHIM THE NOMINATED CANDIDATE OF THE PDP FROM THE FINAL LIST OF CANDIDATES FOR THE OFFICE OF GOVERNOR OF GOMBE STATE FOR THE 2027 GENERAL ELECTIONS - DEMAND FOR IMMEDIATE PUBLICATION WITHIN THREE (3) DAYS We act as Solicitors to Professor Isa Ali Ibrahim and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) (hereinafter referred to as “our Clients”) and on their firm instructions, write in respect of the publication by the Commission on the 10th day of October, 2026 of the Final List of Candidates for the 2027 general elections from which the name of PROF ISA ALI IBRAHIM, the duly nominated candidate of the PDP for the office of Governor of Gombe State, was omitted without any reason being given. Professor Isa Ali Ibrahim is a duly registered member of the PDP at Pantami Ward, Gombe State. The updated PDP membership register (containing his name) was duly submitted to the Commission. (See Annexure A hereto). He purchased the Expression of Interest and Nomination Forms of the PDP for the gubernatorial primary; After screening and clearance, he participated in the governorship primary election of the PDP, Gombe State, emerging as the winner on the 26th day of May, 2026. Thereafter, the PDP submitted his personal particulars (Form EC9) to the Commission on the 8th day of August, 2026 pursuant to Section 29(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026, and the Commission published his name on the 29th day of August, 2026 pursuant to Section 29(3) of the Act. Up to this point, no step was taken by the Commission to question any aspect of his emergence. The primary of 26th May, 2026 was thereafter challenged in Suit No. FHC/GM/CS/9/2026 between Usman Aliyu (Garry) v. PDP & 2 Ors and Suit No. FHC/GM/CS/10/2026 between Khamisu Ahmed & Anor v. PDP & 2 Ors before the Federal High Court, Gombe. The Second and fourth questions submitted for determination, respectively in the Originating Summons squarely challenged the membership of Isa Ali Ibrahim, contending that his name not being in the PDP register submitted to the Commission, he was ineligible to contest the primary. Those issues were fully litigated on affidavit evidence and determined. At pages 57 of the judgment in Suit No. FHC/GM/CS/9/2026, the Court held, in terms thus: “I therefore find that the Plaintiff has not established that the 3rd Defendant was legally incapable of being recognised by the 1st Defendant as its member. Accordingly, question two is resolved against the Plaintiff. Question four concerns whether the 3rd Defendant validly emerged as the 1st Defendant's gubernatorial candidate having regard to Sections 177(c) and 228(b) of the Constitution. Section 177(c) requires a person seeking election as Governor to be a member of, and sponsored by, a political party. I have already resolved the issue of membership against the Plaintiff. The remaining question is therefore whether the 3rd Defendant derived valid sponsorship from the nomination process of the 1st Defendant. That question has substantially been answered under questions one and three”. Equally in Suit No. FHC/GM/CS/10/2026 the Court resolved Questions 1, 2 and 3 in favour of the Plaintiff, but resolved Question 4 - the membership and eligibility of Isa Ali Ibrahim against the Plaintiff. At pages 65-66 of the judgment, the Court held, in terms thus: “As to PDP membership, even though the 2nd Defendant's name does not appear in Exhibit A, that fact alone is not conclusive of his non-membership. The Supreme Court has consistently held that membership of a political party is ordinarily a matter within the domestic affairs of the party and that it is primarily for the party to determine who its members are. See Enang v. Asuquo & Ors supra. In the present case, the ...

Gombe 2027: Pantami’s fresh PDP primary victory gets legal backing — Ex-NBA Chair By Ibrahim Ramalan A legal practitioner and former Chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA, Gombe State, Ahmed Tukur, has argued that a recent Federal High Court judgment strengthened the position of former Minister of Communications and Digital Economy, Prof. Isa Ali Ibrahim Pantami, in the dispute over the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, primary election for the 2027 general election. Mr Tukur said the judgment, which nullified the PDP primary held on May 26, 2026 and ordered the party to conduct a fresh exercise, gave Mr Pantami what he described as three significant legal advantages: judicial confirmation of his party membership, the nullification of the disputed May primary and a fresh primary victory conducted under the supervision of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC. He made the submissions in a legal analysis titled, “How the Federal High Court Judgment Fortified Pantami: A Judicial Seal on Membership, Nullification of May Primary, and a Fresh 29 September 2026 Primary Victory.” According to him, the court expressly found that Mr Pantami was a valid member of the PDP and that his name appeared in the party’s official membership register submitted to INEC. Mr Tukur argued that the finding was significant because party membership is one of the issues that can be raised in pre-election litigation under the Electoral Act and the Constitution. He cited Section 77 of the Electoral Act 2026, which deals with party membership registers, and Section 40 of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of association. The lawyer said the court relied on an INEC-certified copy of the PDP membership register, identified as CTC No. INEC/ABJ/REG/CTC/GM/2026/114, dated September 2, 2026. He argued that the judicial finding would make it more difficult for opponents to successfully challenge Pantami’s membership in subsequent litigation. Tukur also said the judgment effectively extinguished the legal consequences of the May 26 primary after the court found that the exercise did not comply with the applicable provisions of the Electoral Act. He cited previous Supreme Court decisions, including Amaechi v. INEC and PDP v. Ezeonwuka, to support his argument that where a primary election is nullified and a fresh primary ordered, the earlier exercise ceases to have legal effect. “The May 26 primary is void ab initio,” he argued. According to him, the fresh primary conducted by the PDP on September 29 should therefore be treated as a new electoral exercise rather than a continuation of the earlier primary. Mr Tukur said the September 29 exercise was conducted through the direct primary method and monitored by INEC. He said Pantami emerged winner with 2,054 votes against his closest opponent, who secured 389 votes. The lawyer argued that the fresh primary complied with the provisions of Sections 77 and 84 of the Electoral Act, particularly following the Supreme Court’s decision in a case involving INEC and the Zenith Labour Party, which he said reaffirmed the applicable legal framework for party primaries. According to him, the PDP’s use of the direct primary system and INEC’s participation in monitoring the exercise further strengthened Pantami’s position. He also argued that the membership register used for the September 29 primary was the INEC-certified register dated September 2, 2026, which he said satisfied the statutory requirement concerning the submission of party membership registers. Mr Tukur further contended that once a party has conducted a valid primary and submitted its candidate’s name to INEC in accordance with the law, the electoral body cannot unilaterally remove the candidate except in circumstances permitted by law or pursuant to a court order. He cited provisions of Sections 29, 32, 33 and 88 of the Electoral Act, as well as judicial authorities including Dingyadi v. INEC, Action Alliance v. INEC ...