Key points
- A Federal High Court in Abuja fined a plaintiff ₦1 million over delays in a suit seeking to stop former President Goodluck Jonathan from contesting the 2027 presidential election.
- Justice Peter Lifu criticised the conduct of the plaintiff, Johnmary Jideobi, and his lawyer, Ndubuisi Ukpai, describing their handling of the case as “unacceptable.”
- The court observed that key defendants, including INEC and the Attorney General of the Federation, had not been served months after the suit was filed.
- Jonathan’s lawyer accused the plaintiff of showing disrespect to the court and abandoning the case after initiating it.
- The matter has been adjourned until May 18, 2026, for hearing of all pending applications and the substantive suit.
Main story
The Federal High Court in Abuja has imposed a ₦1 million fine on a plaintiff seeking to bar former President Goodluck Jonathan from participating in the 2027 presidential election, following repeated procedural delays and failures to properly prosecute the case.
Delivering ruling on Friday, Justice Peter Lifu faulted the conduct of the plaintiff, Johnmary Jideobi, and his counsel, Ndubuisi Ukpai, over what the court described as prolonged negligence and lack of diligence in handling the politically sensitive matter.
The court ruled that the ₦1 million cost be paid to Jonathan, who is listed as the first defendant in the suit.
Justice Lifu stressed that political cases require accelerated hearing in line with judicial policy and electoral timelines, warning that unnecessary delays undermine the administration of justice.
The judge particularly expressed concern that although the suit was filed on October 6, 2025, critical parties including the Independent National Electoral Commission and the Attorney General of the Federation had still not been served with originating court processes more than six months later.
What’s being said
In his ruling, Justice Lifu said:
“I have carefully and painstakingly considered all the submissions and prayers of the learned counsel in this matter. As this court has earlier ruled and ordered, this case has a character of politics. I have taken judicial notice of the timetable of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
“The duty of this court is to ensure that political cases are given accelerated hearing and disposed of expeditiously.”
The judge further condemned the delays that stalled proceedings, stating:
“This case is for hearing today and the hearing has been frustrated or aborted due to the tardiness of the plaintiff who is a lawyer by training and calling. Hearing cannot go on now. Consequently, I hold that punishment should lie where the fault is.”
Counsel to the former president, Chief Chris Uche, SAN, also criticised the plaintiff’s conduct before the court.
“The plaintiff thinks he can hold the court and other parties to ransom, and stayback in the comfort of his house and drag all of us to court,” he said.
“They think the courts are toothless bulldog and the dignity of the court must be protected my lord.”
The issues
At the centre of the controversy is a legal challenge seeking to prevent Jonathan from contesting the 2027 presidential election — a case that has already attracted political and constitutional interest.
However, the proceedings have become overshadowed by concerns over procedural incompetence and alleged abuse of court process after repeated failures by the plaintiff to serve necessary parties and appear in court.
The judge noted that Jonathan’s legal team only became aware of the suit through media reports before independently filing responses and preliminary objections.
The Attorney General of the Federation’s counsel, J.D. Esho, also informed the court that her office had not received the plaintiff’s originating summons, while INEC reportedly only received hearing notices without the substantive court filings.
The repeated absence of the plaintiff and his lawyer further intensified concerns over whether the suit was being diligently pursued.
What’s next
Justice Lifu has granted the plaintiff a short window to serve all pending court documents on INEC and the Attorney General of the Federation.
Both defendants have been directed to file their responses before May 18, 2026, when the matter will return to court for definite hearing of all pending applications and the substantive suit.
The next hearing is expected to determine whether the case will proceed on its merits or face additional procedural hurdles.
Bottom line
What began as a politically significant suit challenging Goodluck Jonathan’s potential 2027 presidential ambition has now shifted focus to questions surrounding legal diligence, courtroom conduct and procedural compliance.
With the court openly expressing frustration over delays and imposing financial sanctions on the plaintiff, the case is increasingly becoming as much about judicial discipline as it is about electoral eligibility.
