Posted on Leave a comment

Court delays hearing on suit seeking to bar Goodluck Jonathan from 2027 poll

Court delays hearing on suit seeking to bar Goodluck Jonathan from 2027 poll

A legal attempt to prevent former President Goodluck Jonathan from running in the 2027 presidential election has hit another procedural hurdle. The case, initiated by lawyer Johnmary Jideobi, saw its scheduled hearing on Friday adjourned after the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) failed to appear in court.

This marks the second time INEC has been absent, having also skipped the previous session on May 11. Additionally, the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), listed as the third defendant, informed the court that he had not been served with the originating summons, preventing him from filing any response.

Justice Peter Odo Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja ruled that adjourning the case was necessary to ensure fair hearing. He rescheduled the hearing for May 18 and directed the plaintiff to properly serve all relevant parties with court documents.

Earlier, on May 11, the plaintiff and his lawyer were also absent without explanation, prompting Justice Lifu to postpone the hearing. At that session, Chris Uche, SAN, representing Jonathan, had urged the court to dismiss the case for lack of diligent prosecution and sought a N5 million cost against the plaintiff.

In his suit, Jideobi argues that Jonathan has already served two terms: completing the remainder of late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua’s tenure and a full four-year term after the 2011 election. He contends that sections of the 1999 Constitution bar Jonathan from seeking office again. An affidavit by Emmanuel Agida supports this, noting that Jonathan assumed office on May 6, 2010, and that reports of his potential 2027 candidacy prompted the legal action.

The plaintiff seeks an order restraining Jonathan from presenting himself to any political party as an aspirant and preventing INEC from accepting or processing his candidacy. He warns that without court intervention, a party might nominate Jonathan, leading to a third oath of office, which he argues would violate constitutional limits.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *