Explainer: Why Court Ruled Jonathan Can Contest 2027 Presidency
Federal High Court cites existing appellate decisions and constitutional interpretation in affirming former president’s eligibility
A Federal High Court in Abuja has ruled that former President Goodluck Jonathan remains eligible to contest the 2027 presidential election. Here is a breakdown of the legal arguments, constitutional provisions, and court reasoning behind the decision.
A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has ruled that former President Goodluck Jonathan remains eligible to contest the 2027 presidential election, reopening public discussion around constitutional tenure limits and presidential succession.
Justice Peter Lifu held that there is no legal barrier preventing Jonathan from contesting and noted that the matter had already been substantially determined by the Court of Appeal.
Why the Case Was Filed
The legal action challenged Jonathan’s eligibility based on the argument that he had already taken the presidential oath twice.
Jonathan first became president in 2010 after the death of President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua and later won the 2011 presidential election.
The plaintiff argued that another successful presidential bid in 2027 would exceed the constitutional limit allowed for a Nigerian president.
The suit relied on Section 137(3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), which provides that a person who assumes office to complete another president’s tenure cannot be elected into that office more than once.
Based on this provision, the plaintiff sought to stop Jonathan from contesting future elections and asked the court to prevent INEC from recognising any future candidature.
Why the Court Ruled in Jonathan’s Favour
Justice Lifu dismissed the suit, ruling that the plaintiff lacked the legal standing required to bring the case before the court.
The judge also stated that Jonathan’s eligibility had already been addressed in previous judicial decisions and therefore did not require fresh determination.
The court relied on existing appellate decisions which had earlier concluded that applying the constitutional amendment retroactively would not be appropriate.
Questions surrounding Jonathan’s eligibility have existed for years because he completed the remaining tenure of a deceased president before securing election for a full term.
The controversy increased after the introduction of Section 137(3) through the Fourth Alteration Act in 2018.
Supporters of Jonathan maintained that the provision should not apply to events that occurred before the amendment became law, while critics argued that constitutional tenure limits should still apply.
The latest judgment reinforces earlier court positions and means that, legally, Jonathan remains eligible to contest the 2027 presidential election if he chooses to enter the race.
