2027: Nigerians Beam Searchlight On Judiciary

0

LAGOS – Barrister Olalekan Festus Ojo, a Lagos-based hu­man rights lawyer and a strong advocate of social justice, has raised alarm over the pattern of judicial decisions aris­ing from the courts as the nation gets closer to the 2027 general elections, saying that the trend is deeply troubling.

Speaking exclusively with Sunday Independent at the weekend, Barrister Ojo, and the Managing Partner, Platinum & Taylor Hill LP, one of Nigeria’s leading law firms, lamented that no fewer than seven of the 21 political parties recognisd by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) are currently entan­gled in active court cases.

He stated that with the spread of litigation across multiple court levels, the current situation is already creating enormous pressure as the electoral time­table approaches.

Ojo said: “The pattern of judicial decisions preceding the 2027 elections is deeply troubling. What we are witness­ing is the dangerous judicialisation of opposition politics, courts are reshaping leadership structures through injunc­tions, suspending or reinstating party executives, and playing decisive roles in internal crises within the PDP, ADC and others.

“The Hon. Justice Lifu episode, where judgment was delivered in contempt of a subsisting Court of Appeal order, rep­resents the most egregious manifesta­tion of this trend.

“Democracies thrive when institu­tions operate within constitutional lim­its. Whenever judicial decisions appear to override popular will, public trust suffers irreparably.

“The likelihood of opposition parties being excluded through court processes remains real and present.

“However, the Court of Appeal’s swift intervention offers cautious reassurance that Nigeria’s appellate courts retain both the will and the authority to correct such excesses. Vigilance, from civil so­ciety, the Bar, and the public, remains indispensable.”

Barrister Kenneth Udeze, the National Chairman of Action Alliance (AA), while speaking with Sunday Independent, main­tained that so far, the judiciary has played a dual role.

He stressed: “It remains the final arbiter for intra-party dis­putes and pre-election matters, but several recent judgments on party deregistration, leadership crisis, and candidate disqualifica­tions have increased pressure on opposition parties.

“These rulings, while ground­ed in electoral law and party constitutions, have often landed mid-cycle, disrupting party struc­tures ahead of 2027.

“The likelihood of some op­position parties being barred through court processes is real. If pending cases on compliance, leadership, or registration re­quirements are resolved against them, INEC can act on those judgments.

“Outcome will depend on evidence, timing, and how con­sistently the courts apply the Electoral Act 2022.”

Hon. John Kome, a People Democratic Party (PDP) chief­tain, told Sunday Independent that indeed, certain Nigerians in the Judicial profession as well as the legal realm of this country, have debased Nigeria before the global intellectual community.

Dr Kome, the PDP’s candidate for the Ikeja State Constituency 1, House of Assembly election in 2023, stated that people asked Nigerians outside the shores of the country why they are lawless and disorganised.

Hon. Kome added: “But we usually defend the integrity of our once great country, even when we know deep down in our heart that Nigeria’s political elites have rubbished the digni­ty, honour and respect that the country once commanded in the comity of nations.

“The judiciary was known to be the last hope of the common man and also the hope of those cheated under the law.

“But, alas, the opposite has become the case with Nigeria’s judicial system. The Nigerian so­ciety is today helpless, confused and hopeless politically.

“When the Judiciary gives conflicting judgments at different courts, one asks himself: What motivation or who is behind these varying judgments at the higher or lower courts?

“Moreover, should Nigeria’s democracy be different from western democracy?”

Professor John Ebhomien, a chieftain of the All Progressives Congress (APC), said that so far, the judiciary has played a dual role ahead of 2027, adding that it has been both an arbiter and a pressure point.

He stated: “Courts have been central in deciding election dis­putes, defections, and candidate nominations. Some rulings have stabilised parties by resolving internal crises, but others have been seen as ‘unpalatable’ be­cause they favoured the ruling APC or produced conflicting judgments from courts of coor­dinate jurisdiction.

“That pattern has increased perceptions that litigation, not primaries or elections, is de­ciding who controls opposition parties. The result is parties are spending more time in court than on grassroots mobilisation.

“There is therefore the likeli­hood of exclusion via court. This is possible, but not inevitable. Op­position parties with unresolved leadership or nomination cases risk court orders disqualifying candidates or even deregistering factions.

“INEC cannot accept candi­dates whose sponsorship is void­ed by a final court judgment.

“However, the Supreme Court remains the final check. If it en­forces consistency and timeli­ness, the judiciary can protect participation.

“If contradictory rulings persist, litigation will keep being used as a political tool to shrink the opposition field.”

Dr Bolaji O. Akinyemi, an Apostle and Convener, Apostolic Round Table (ART), said: “The ju­diciary occupies a very delicate position in any democracy.

“It is expected to be the im­partial umpire that protects the Constitution, safeguards the electoral process, and ensures that no political actor operates above the law.

“However, when judicial de­cisions repeatedly produce out­comes that significantly alter the political landscape, partic­ularly in the period leading up to major elections, it is natural for citizens to raise questions and seek reassurance about the independence and consistency of the courts.

“Ahead of the 2027 general elections, we have witnessed a number of judicial interventions affecting opposition parties and political actors.

“The deregistration of Ac­cord, concerns arising from legal disputes that could poten­tially affect Governor Ademola Adeleke’s participation in the Osun governorship election, and the recent court decisions affecting local government ad­ministration in Osun State have all contributed to a growing per­ception that the judiciary is be­coming a major determinant of political outcomes.

“It is important to state that courts must decide cases based on law and evidence, not public sentiment. However, justice must not only be done; it must also be seen to be done.

“Where judicial pronounce­ments consistently generate uncertainty around opposition participation, the judiciary must be conscious of the broader im­plications for public confidence in the democratic process.

“The greatest danger is not necessarily that opposition par­ties will be stopped through court processes; the greater danger is the erosion of public trust in the neutrality of those processes.

“Democracy thrives when political contests are settled primarily by voters at the ballot box, with the courts serving as referees, rather than becoming the central arena of political competition.

“As we move closer to 2027, all institutions—the judiciary, INEC, political parties, civil so­ciety, and the executive arm of government—must act in ways that strengthen confidence in electoral integrity.

“Any perception that court­rooms are being used, rightly or wrongly, as instruments for narrowing political participa­tion could create unnecessary tensions and weaken faith in democratic institutions.

“My expectation is that the judiciary will remain faithful to its constitutional mandate and ensure that every eligible polit­ical party and candidate enjoys equal protection under the law.

“Nigeria’s democracy will be stronger when elections are won through persuasion of voters and not through technical exclu­sions that leave citizens feeling deprived of genuine political choices.”

Julius Adegunna, a media executive, stated: “It is often believed that the judiciary has the way it operates fairly, by the rule of law, and it works on laid down principles before coming to judgment.

“With what has happened so far, I will not say that the judicia­ry has been a disappointment to Nigerians. I think Nigerians, especially politicians, in this case need to learn how to do things right, always.

“However, the last judgment deregistering some leading po­litical parties for failing to meet electoral provisions came at an odd time.

“Such a case would have been decided long before a major na­tional election. Be that as it may, I believe the concerned political parties still have time to appeal the judgment.

“But, let us hope that will not affect their showing in the com­ing elections, and this may affect the fundamental human rights of some Nigerians by refusing them freedom of association.”