Reported by: Ijeoma G | Edited by: Oravbiere Osayomore Promise.
The Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and the Attorney‑General of the Federation (AGF) to be formally served with hearing notices in a suit seeking to bar former President Goodluck Jonathan from contesting the 2027 presidential election. Justice Peter Lifu gave the directive on Monday, May 11, 2026, after it emerged that neither the electoral umpire nor the federal government’s chief law officer had been notified of the proceedings. The case, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2102/2025, was filed on October 6, 2025, by a lawyer, Johnmary Jideobi, who is asking the court to disqualify Jonathan on constitutional grounds.
When the matter was called, only Jonathan’s lead counsel, Chief Chris Uche, SAN, was present in court. There was no representative for the plaintiff, nor any appearance for INEC or the AGF, who are listed as second and third defendants respectively. Uche informed the court that the hearing had been scheduled for 2 p.m. at the plaintiff’s own request. “They have lost interest in pursuing the suit, particularly after we have filed and served our notice of preliminary objection and other processes,” Uche argued. He urged the court to strike out the matter for lack of diligent prosecution and to award N5 million in costs against the plaintiff. According to Uche, the plaintiff himself is a legal practitioner, yet neither he nor his lawyer, Ndubuisi Ukpai, offered any explanation for their absence.
Justice Lifu, however, declined the request for an immediate dismissal. The judge directed the court registrar to verify whether hearing notices had been served on INEC and the AGF. The registrar confirmed that neither party had been served. “Let us give them time. Let this order be served on INEC because INEC is fundamental in this case. Let us listen to INEC in this matter,” Justice Lifu stated. The judge emphasised that the principles of fair hearing required that the two defendants be given another opportunity to participate in the proceedings. He consequently adjourned the case until May 15, 2026, for a definite hearing and ordered that fresh hearing notices be issued and served on the plaintiff as well as INEC and the AGF.
The suit challenges Jonathan’s eligibility based on Sections 1(1), (2), (3) and 137(3) of the 1999 Constitution. The plaintiff contends that Jonathan has already exhausted the constitutional limit of two presidential tenures. According to an affidavit filed in support of the suit, Jonathan assumed office as president on May 6, 2010, following the death of President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua the previous day. He subsequently won the 2011 presidential election and served a full four‑year term. The plaintiff argues that having completed Yar’Adua’s unexpired tenure and then served a full term of his own, Jonathan is barred from seeking the presidency again. “The plaintiff believes that the 1st defendant, having completed the unexpired term of late President Yar’Adua and subsequently served a full term after the 2011 election, has exhausted the constitutional limit of two tenures as president,” the affidavit stated.
Jonathan has filed a preliminary objection through his lawyer, Chief Chris Uche, SAN, arguing that the suit is speculative, premature and founded on media conjecture. He also contends that the plaintiff lacks the legal standing (locus standi) to bring the action. In a related development, Jonathan had, on the same day, asked the court to strike out the suit on the grounds of the plaintiff’s absence, describing the failure to appear as an abandonment of the case.
The court’s decision to compel the appearance of INEC and the AGF introduces a new dimension to the litigation. If the suit proceeds, the electoral commission will be required to state its position on whether Jonathan remains eligible to contest. The AGF’s involvement could also shape the federal government’s stance on the constitutional interpretation of presidential term limits.
Jonathan, who has not yet declared his intention to run in 2027, has consistently said he is “still consulting” on the matter. However, a coalition of supporters has been actively urging him to enter the race, staging demonstrations outside his Abuja residence. His potential candidacy is seen as a wild card in the rapidly shifting opposition landscape, where Peter Obi and Rabiu Kwankwaso have recently consolidated their alliance under the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC).
Justice Lifu’s refusal to strike out the suit ensures that the eligibility question will be determined on its merits, provided that the plaintiff and the other parties appear on the next adjourned date. The judge warned that he would not hesitate to impose punitive costs if there is another failure to appear.
The case has attracted significant public interest, as a ruling in favour of the plaintiff could permanently bar Jonathan from the presidential ballot, while a dismissal would clear the way for him to contest if he chooses to do so. As the May 15 hearing approaches, all eyes are on INEC and the AGF, whose formal responses may finally resolve the legal uncertainty surrounding one of Nigeria’s most talked‑about potential 2027 candidates.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters News | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments