Abuja, May 18, 2026
The Federal High Court in Abuja has scheduled May 26 to deliver judgment in a suit seeking to prevent former President Goodluck Jonathan from contesting the 2027 presidential election.
Justice Peter Lifu fixed the date on Monday after counsel representing the parties adopted their written submissions and argued their positions before the court.
The suit was instituted by lawyer Johnmary Jideobi against Jonathan, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), and the Attorney-General of the Federation.
At the hearing, only the legal representatives of Jonathan and the Attorney-General were present, while INEC had no representation despite reportedly being served with the necessary court documents. Following confirmation of service, Justice Lifu ruled that the commission had forfeited its right to defend the matter.
Counsel to the plaintiff, Ndubuisi Ukpai, informed the court of an application filed on May 11 requesting the judge to withdraw from the case over claims of bias. He urged the court to grant the request.
Reacting, counsel to Jonathan, Chief Chris Uche (SAN), strongly opposed the motion, describing it as unfounded and misleading. He told the court that a counter-affidavit had already been filed in response, insisting that the allegations against the judge lacked merit.
Uche urged the court to reject the application, describing it as an abuse of court process, and requested that it be dismissed with substantial costs awarded against the plaintiff.
Counsel representing Attorney-General Lateef Fagbemi, Maimuna Lami-Shiru, also opposed the request for the judge’s withdrawal. She argued that judicial recusal only applies where circumstances genuinely threaten fairness or impartiality. According to her, the plaintiff’s application failed to establish such grounds and should therefore be dismissed.
Lami-Shiru further asked the court to award N2 million in costs against the plaintiff, maintaining that the motion was baseless and legally defective.
Addressing the substantive suit, Ukpai said the originating summons, filed in October 2025, contained the reliefs being sought and urged the court to grant them. He also requested time to respond to the counter-affidavit filed by the Attorney-General.
Justice Lifu, however, directed counsel to proceed with oral arguments since the matter had earlier been granted accelerated hearing.
In response, Uche argued that the suit lacked merit and relied on previous judgments of both the Federal High Court and the Court of Appeal, which he said had already addressed similar issues. He contended that Section 137(3) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, could not be applied retroactively to events predating the amendment.
According to him, Jonathan’s constitutional right to participate in politics remains protected, adding that the case was speculative and premature. He also questioned the plaintiff’s legal standing to institute the action and asked the court to dismiss the suit with N50 million in costs.
Lami-Shiru aligned with Jonathan’s legal team and urged the court to strike out the case entirely, particularly against the Attorney-General.
Jonathan’s lawyer also raised a preliminary objection challenging the court’s jurisdiction to entertain the matter. He argued that the case was hypothetical because no nomination process or election had taken place, making the claims premature. He further maintained that the issues raised had already been resolved in an earlier judgment delivered by the Federal High Court in Yenagoa.
After hearing arguments from all sides, Justice Lifu adjourned proceedings until May 26 for judgment in both the substantive suit and the preliminary objection.