2027: Suit on Jonathan’s Eligibility, Abuse of Court Process- SAN

…Top Lawyer Warns Against Re-litigating Settled Legal Matters

By Yinka Giwa

Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Oba Maduabuchi, has described the latest suit challenging former President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan’s eligibility to contest the 2027 presidential election as an abuse of court process and an attempt to reopen a matter already settled by competent courts.

Maduabuchi stated this in an interview with the media on Tuesday while reacting to a new case filed by Abuja-based lawyer, Johnmary Chukwukasi Jideobi, before the Federal High Court, Abuja. The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2102/2025, seeks to bar Jonathan from presenting himself to any political party for nomination and to restrain the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from accepting or publishing his name as a presidential candidate.

According to Maduabuchi, the issue of Jonathan’s qualification has already been determined in earlier cases and cannot be reopened in another court of equal jurisdiction. “That suit in the Federal High Court of Abuja is an abuse of court process,” he said. “An abuse of court process occurs when someone attempts to relitigate an issue that has already been decided by a court of competent jurisdiction. The question of Dr. Jonathan’s qualification or non-qualification has been settled by the courts in Yenagoa. Nobody appealed that judgment, and until it is set aside, it remains the law.”

As KTH Daily reported yesterday, the Federal High Court sitting in Yenagoa, Bayelsa State, had in 2022 dismissed a similar suit challenging Jonathan’s eligibility to contest in 2023. In that case, Andy Solomon and Idibiye Abraham vs. Goodluck Ebele Jonathan & Ors. (FHC/YNG/CS/86/2022), Justice Isah Dashen ruled that Section 137(3) of the 1999 Constitution, which bars any person who has been sworn in to complete another president’s term from being elected more than once, could not apply to Jonathan because the provision was introduced in 2018—three years after he left office. The court held that the amendment could not operate retroactively.

A similar conclusion was reached by the Court of Appeal in 2015 in Cyriacus Njoku vs. Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, where the court ruled that Jonathan’s assumption of office in 2010, following the death of President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, did not count as an elected tenure and therefore did not breach the constitutional two-term limit. Both rulings remain unchallenged and, according to Maduabuchi, constitute binding legal precedent.

He further explained that when Jonathan took the oath of office in 2010 and again in 2011, Section 137(3) was not part of the Constitution. “When Dr. Jonathan took the oath of office to complete Yar’Adua’s tenure, that provision did not exist,” he said. “It came into effect in 2018, long after he left office. You cannot punish a man for a law that was not in existence when he acted.”

Legal experts agree that the 2018 amendment, part of the Fourth Alteration to the Constitution, cannot apply retroactively. By existing judicial interpretation, Jonathan’s first oath in 2010 was not the result of an election and therefore does not count toward the two-term limit for elected presidents.

Analysts have also cautioned against what they describe as “forum shopping,” where litigants seek to reopen issues already decided by competent courts in hopes of securing different outcomes. They warn that repeated suits on settled matters risk undermining the principle of finality in judicial decisions and eroding public confidence in the judiciary. “The proper course for anyone dissatisfied with the Yenagoa judgment is to appeal, not to file a fresh case before another Federal High Court,” one senior lawyer told KTH Daily.

The renewed legal challenge comes amid ongoing political speculation over Jonathan’s possible role in the 2027 elections. Although the former president has not publicly declared interest, his name continues to feature prominently in political discussions within and outside the two leading opposition parties, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the All Democratic Congress (ADC).

The Federal High Court in Abuja has yet to assign a hearing date for Jideobi’s suit. However, given the standing appellate and Federal High Court rulings affirming Jonathan’s eligibility under Nigerian law, legal observers believe the case is likely to be dismissed. “Until the Yenagoa judgment is overturned on appeal, it remains the law,” Maduabuchi said. “Any fresh case on the same issue is a clear abuse of court process.”