A Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed May 26 as the date to deliver judgment in a suit seeking to permanently bar former President Goodluck Jonathan from contesting the 2027 presidential election — a ruling that could carry significant consequences for the country’s evolving pre-election political landscape.
Justice Peter Lifu set the judgment date on Monday after all parties in the matter adopted their final written arguments. The case, filed by Abuja-based lawyer Johnmary Jideobi, turns on a central constitutional question: given how long Jonathan has previously served as Nigeria’s president, does he remain eligible to seek the office again?
To understand the argument, some background is necessary. Jonathan was first sworn in as president on May 6, 2010, following the death of President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, whose elected term he completed. He then won the 2011 presidential election in his own right and served a full four-year term before losing re-election to Muhammadu Buhari in 2015 in a widely praised peaceful transfer of power.
The 1999 Constitution caps a person’s time in the presidency at two terms of four years each. The plaintiff argues that Jonathan’s completion of Yar’Adua’s remaining tenure, combined with his own full elected term, amounts to having already served the constitutional maximum. To allow Jonathan to run again, the argument goes, would be to permit a third bite at the presidency in violation of the constitution’s spirit and letter. If Jonathan wins in 2027 and serves another four years, he would have held the presidency for a total exceeding eight years — beyond what the constitution intends.
Jonathan’s legal team, led by senior advocate Chris Uche, urged the court to dismiss the suit outright. Uche argued that the plaintiff’s constitutional interpretation is incorrect, and pointed to previous court decisions in related suits — filed by other individuals — that were dismissed. He asked the court to award N50 million in costs against the plaintiff, describing the recusal application as frivolous and an abuse of court process.
The Federal Government’s law officer, Attorney-General of the Federation Lateef Fagbemi, aligned fully with Jonathan’s position and joined in asking the court to throw out the case.
The Independent National Electoral Commission, listed as the second defendant in the suit, did not appear in court and had no legal representative present at Monday’s proceedings.
An additional complication arose from an application filed by the plaintiff asking Justice Lifu to withdraw from the case, alleging the judge had shown bias by shortening the time initially allowed for responses to Jonathan’s counter-affidavit. Justice Lifu will rule on this recusal application and the main suit simultaneously on May 26 — meaning two significant questions will be answered on the same day.
The relief the plaintiff is seeking, if granted, would be sweeping. He wants a permanent court order preventing Jonathan from presenting himself to any political party as a presidential aspirant, not just in 2027 but in any future election. He also wants INEC restrained from accepting, processing or publishing Jonathan’s name as a presidential candidate.
The constitutional question at the heart of the case is genuinely debated among legal experts. Some argue that completing an unexpired term following the death of a sitting president is legally distinct from serving a full elected term, and that Jonathan therefore served only one full term of his own and remains eligible for another. Others argue that the spirit of the two-term limit is to prevent prolonged individual occupation of the presidency, regardless of how the time in office was accumulated, and that Jonathan has already served long enough.
Jonathan himself has not made a definitive public statement on whether he intends to run in 2027. A coalition of northern political groups, PDP leaders and youth organisations has publicly urged him to enter the race. Some prominent lawyers have publicly advised against it, warning of constitutional complexity and the likelihood of prolonged litigation. His continued public silence on the question has only fed speculation.
If the court clears him to run, Jonathan would enter a crowded and competitive field that already includes President Tinubu seeking re-election, Peter Obi on the NDC platform and Atiku Abubakar expected to contest again. His presence would further splinter opposition votes and reshape the political calculations of every major party.
If the court rules him out, the opposition landscape narrows and the pressure on the remaining candidates to consolidate support intensifies.
Whatever Justice Lifu rules on May 26, an appeal is widely expected. The case may ultimately travel to the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court before a final and binding answer is delivered. But for now, the first official judicial word on one of Nigeria’s most debated political questions is one week away.