Connect with us

Politics

2027: Jonathan Opens Up On Eligibility To Run Again

Published

on

The controversy over the eligibility of former President Goodluck Jonathan to join the 2027 presidential race took a twist last week when it emerged that a court had cleared the obstacle to his being sworn in for the third time as president.

Critics had cited Section 137(3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) which provides that no elected person into public office in Nigeria shall be sworn-in more than twice, basing their argument on the former president’s swearing-in in 2010 after his predecessor, the late President Umaru Yar’Adua, died in office, and 2011 when he won his own election. He left office in 2025 after losing reelection and the Section 137(3) wasn’t law until 2018, three years later, triggering the argument on whether or not the law can apply to him retroactively.

Significantly, some leaders of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) are pushing for him to contest on the platform of the party the 2027 presidential election.

Advertisement

Vanguard obtained the judgment of the Federal High Court Yenagoa which heard the case and the trial judge, Hon. Justice Isa H. Dashen, while reviewing the submissions made before him on May 27, 2022, quoted copiously from the Counter-Affidavit in which Jonathan made his case, saying he could not be legally stopped from participating in presidential election in the future based on Section 137(3) of the Constitution.

Dashen agreed with the former president’s position.

Curiously, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), which were both joined as Defendants in the suit filed by two persons who described themselves as APC members (Andy Solomon and Ibidiye Abraham), failed to make appearances despite being served with all the processes, forcing the presiding judge to remark that they agreed with all the facts of the case as pleaded by the Plaintiffs and Jonathan who was the First Defendant.

Advertisement

On this, he noted: “As earlier stated, both 2nd and 3rd Defendants (APC and INEC) did not file any processes in response or reaction thereto despite service of the Originating process on them.

“In the locus classicus case of OYEYIPO VS OYINLOYE (1987) I

READ ALSO:Court Ruling Clears Jonathan For 2027 Presidential Bid Amid Pressure From Parties

Advertisement

NWLR (Part 50) 350, the Apex Court held thus: ‘A Defendant who fails to enter appearance or file Counter-Affidavit in response to the averments in support of the Originating Summons would be presumed to have Demurred and admitted the facts deposed to in the Affidavit filed in support Originating Summons.

“See the recent case of FUTMINA & ORS VS OLUTAYO (2017)

LPELR- 43827 (SC) and CHEVRON (NIG) LTD VS IMO STATE

Advertisement

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY AND ORS (2016) LPELR- 41563 (CA) where the Appellate Courts confirmed the above position”.

The Jonathan case
Dashen, in his judgment while referring to Jonathan’s Counter-Affidavit in which he made his case, said: “The 1st Defendant’s Counter-Affidavit is of Twelve (12) paragraphs and is deposed to by one Engr. Peletiri John Debetimi who described himself as an Assistant to the 1st Defendant.

“One (1) exhibit marked as Exhibit EKOI was annexed to the said Counter-Affidavit.

Advertisement

“Exhibit EKOI is a copy of the Official Gazette containing the 4th Alteration to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999.

“In summary, the 1st Defendant’s response, as stated in his Counter-

Affidavit, is that he has never been ‘elected’ into the Office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on Two (2) previous occasions.

Advertisement

“The 1st Defendant stated that the oath of office he took on the 6th of May, 2010 was taken upon his ‘Election’ as President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

“The 1st Defendant further asserted that he took the said oath to complete the aborted tenure of the late President Umar Yar’ Adua.

“The 1st Defendant referred the Court to the decision of the Court of Appeal in the case of CYRIACUS NJOKU VS.GOODLUCK EBELE JONATHAN (2015) LPELR-24496 wherein the Court of Appeal held that the oath of office he took on 6th May, 2010 cannot be taken into account in the interpretation of the provisions of Section 137(1) (b) of the Constitution.

Advertisement

The 1st Defendant, thereafter, stated that he has only been elected to the Office of President once and in year 2011.

READ ALSO:2027: Jonathan’s Cousin Tackles Keyamo Over Ex-president Not Qualified Comment

With respect to the provisions of Section 137(3) of the Constitution, the 1st Defendant stated that from Exhibit EKOI (i.e. the Official Gazette of the 4th Alteration of the Constitution), ‘Commencement’ date of the said amendment to the provisions of Section 137 of the Constitution therein contained is said to be ‘7th Day of June, 2018’. “Therefore, the 1st Defendant contended that the amendment introduced by sub-section (3) of Section 137 of the Constitution came into effect and became operational from 7th June, 2018.

Advertisement

“On the basis of the foregoing, the Defendant contended that since he took the first oath of office as President in year 2010 and the second oath of office in year 2011 respectively, the 4th Alteration of the Constitution which took effect from th June, 2018 cannot be applied retrospectively to prevent him from exercising his right to contest for the Office of President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, which said right accrued to him since year 2015 before the 4th Alteration to the Constitution was effected.

Three questions
In his written address, the 1st Defendant formulated three (3) questions for the determination of this Court.

“Whilst the 1st Defendant adopted questions 2 and 3 submitted by the Plaintiffs, he re-phrased question 1 submitted by the Plaintiffs.

Advertisement

“Therefore, the questions submitted by the Plaintiffs and the 1st Defendant are congruent and are not substantially different.

“The questions submitted by the 1st Defendant read as follows:

1. Whether in view of the provisions of:

Advertisement

a. Section 137(1)(b) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as altered); and

b. Section 137 (3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as altered) (as contained in the 4th Alteration (No.16) Act 2017), the 1st Defendant is qualified to contest for the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in the 2023 General Elections.

2. If the answer to 1 above is in the affirmative, then: Whether the

Advertisement

2nd Defendant is entitled to field the 1st Defendant as its presidential candidate in the 2023 General Elections.

3. Whether the 3rd Defendant is entitled to disqualify the 1st Defendant from contesting and/or from 2nd Defendant’s presidential candidate in the 2023 General Elections.

Again, at paragraphs 4.00 4.05 of his written address, the 1st Defendant raised a Preliminary Point challenging the locus standi of the Plaintiffs to institute the instant suit.

Advertisement

READ ALSO:APC Mocks Jonathan As ADC Woos Him For 2027 Race

“I shall deal with this preliminary point whilst considering the substantive Originating Summons.

“On the basis of the foregoing, the 1st Defendant asserted that he is eminently qualified to contest for and/or nominated for election into the Office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Advertisement

“The 1st Defendant therefore urged the Court to discountenance the Plaintiffs’ contentions and answer the questions submitted in the Originating Summons in his favour and against the Plaintiffs and refuse the reliefs sought for by the Plaintiffs”.

For the part of the Plaintiffs, the questions they wanted resolved by the court, according to the judge, are:

1. Whether, in view of the provisions of Section 137(1)(b) and (3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as altered) and the fact that the 1st Defendant had earlier been sworn-in as the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in 2010 and 2011 respectively, the 1st Defendant is qualified to contest for the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in the 2023 General Elections to be organized by the 3rd Defendant (INEC).

Advertisement

2. If the answer to 1 above is in the negative, then: Whether the 2nd

Defendant (APC) is entitled to field the 1st Defendant as its presidential candidate in the 2023 General Elections.

3. Whether the 3rd Defendant (INEC) is entitled to disqualify the 1st Defendant (Jonathan) from contesting and/or from being presented as the 2nd Defendant’s (APC) presidential candidate in the 2023 General Elections.

Advertisement

Juxtaposition
Reading his judgment, Justice Dashen said: “Having carefully considered the arguments of the parties, I am of the view that the determination of the application or otherwise of the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 137 of the Constitution to the 1st Defendant lies on the juxtaposition of the date when the 1st Defendant claims to have acquired his present right to be sworn-in as President and the date on which sub- section (3) of Section 137 of the Constitution took effect.

“The starting point is to acknowledge the fact that sub-section (3) of Section 137 of the Constitution was not originally part of the corpus of the Constitution. Sub-section (3) of Section 137 of the Constitution was introduced by the 4th Alteration to the said Constitution.

“Although the 1st Defendant attached the Official Gazette wherein this alteration was published as Exhibit EKO I (i.e. Exhibit) to his Counter-Affidavit, this Court is empowered to take judicial notice of the law by virtue of the provisions of Section 122(2)(a) of the Evidence Act 2011. A cursory look at Exhibit EKO1 (i.e. Exhibit) will reveal that the 4th Alteration introduced a restriction with regard to the number of times a person, sworn-in as President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to complete the term for which another person was elected, can be sworn-in as President after completing the remainder of the said term.

Advertisement

“Sub- section (3) of Section 137 of the Constitution states that any person who was so sworn-in shall, after completing the term of such other person, be eligible to be only elected to the office of President for a single term.

“Further scrutiny of Exhibit EKOI (i.e. Exhibit) also reveals that the 4th Alteration was enacted by the National Assembly in 2017; however, the ‘commencement’ date for same was expressly set for ‘7th Day of June, 2018’.

“Having the benefit of reading the Official Gazette (i.e. Exhibit ÉKO1), I therefore have no difficulty in holding that provisions of subsection (3) of Section 137 of the Constitution took effect from 7th June, 2018. And I so hold”.
(VANGUARD)

Advertisement

Politics

Probe Natasha’s Allegations Against Akpabio, Afenifere Urges FG

Published

on

The pan-Yoruba socio-political group, Afenifere, has urged the Federal Government to investigate sexual harassment allegations levelled by Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan against Senate President Godswill Akpabio.

The call followed the Senate’s decision to lift Akpoti-Uduaghan’s six-month suspension.

This, Afenifere said should not overshadow the need to establish the truth of her claims.

Advertisement

In a statement issued on Thursday, Afenifere’s National Organising Secretary, Kole Omololu, said the senator’s recall reflected commitment to the rule of law.

We commend the Senate President, His Excellency Senator Godswill Akpabio, and the Senate leadership for taking a decision that further reinforces the country’s rule of law,” Omololu said.

READ ALSO:Natasha Resumes At Senate, Calls Akpabio Dictator

Advertisement

The group, however, insisted that Akpoti-Uduaghan’s allegations must not be ignored.

For over six months, where are the facts and evidence of her grave allegations?” Afenifere asked.

It called on the “Nigeria Police, Department of State Services (DSS) and National Intelligence Agency (NIA) to carry out a full investigation into the matter.”

Advertisement

Afenifere also recalled Akpoti-Uduaghan’s past false sexual harassment claims against former presidential aide Reno Omokri, which ended in an out-of-court settlement.

Does this not suggest that, without proof, her allegations against Akpabio are suspicious?” Omololu asked.

READ ALSO:UK Regulator Reports Air Peace Over Alleged Safety Violation

Advertisement

The group further criticised Akpoti-Uduaghan for taking her claims to international media, including BBC, CNN, Sky News and Deutsche Welle, saying the move portrayed Nigeria negatively abroad.

It also queried her participation in a session of the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) in New York.

“If Natasha truly participated in the IPU meeting without due nomination, then it simply revealed her compromise or manipulation of our public institutions for pecuniary ends,” the group said.

Advertisement

In March 2025, Natasha was suspended for six months after a row in plenary and her petition accusing Senate President Godswill Akpabio of sexual harassment.

READ ALSO:Naira Appreciates Massively Against US Dollar In The Black Market, Highest In 15 Months

She claimed the incident happened in December 2023, but the Senate’s Ethics Committee dismissed her petition on procedural grounds. Despite a court order halting disciplinary action, the Senate went ahead with her suspension, which also froze her pay and barred her from official duties.

Advertisement

Akpoti-Uduaghan challenged the suspension in court, insisting it was tied to her allegations. While the Senate said it acted over misconduct, the case attracted global attention after she granted interviews to international media. The matter remains unsettled, with Afenifere now urging federal authorities to investigate her claims.

Meanwhile, Natasha formally resumed her duties at the National Assembly on October 7, 2025, after her six-month suspension ended – and immediately claimed that Akpabio is a dictator.

And almost immediately, Akpabio’s media aide Kenny Okolugbo debunked the claim.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

2027: Drama As Atiku Disowns Media Consultant Over Statement On Yoruba

Published

on

The 2023 presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party and a former Vice President, Atiku Abubakar, has denied any association with a media consultant named Kola Johnson.

This is as he also rejected statements released by the media consultant on Wednesday that he would protect Yoruba interests if elected as president in 2027.

Atiku, in a statement issued on Thursday by his Media Adviser, Paul Ibe, alleged that “faceless mercenaries” are behind the false press statement just to discredit him.

Advertisement

He also dismissed the claim as “false and offensive,” describing it as part of a calculated propaganda project to ridicule him in the media.

READ ALSO:Alleged Age Falsification: Absence Of Five Ex-police Officers Stalls Arraignment

The statement specifically mentioned one Kola Johnson, described as a “self-styled media consultant,” who allegedly released a publication claiming that an Atiku administration would be dominated by a single ethnic group.

Advertisement

The statement read, “Our findings point directly to the Presidency, which, in its desperation to smear opposition leaders, has resorted to hiring faceless mercenaries to fabricate fake stories and circulate unauthorised statements on Atiku.

“Particularly offensive is the false claim attributed to this individual that an Atiku administration would be dominated by a single ethnic group. This disinformation is part of a calculated propaganda project designed to ridicule Atiku in the media.

“Let it be clear: Atiku Abubakar has never engaged one Kola Johnson as a media consultant, aide, or associate. Any statement issued in that name is fake and should be disregarded. We urge media houses that have published such falsehoods to immediately retract them.”

Advertisement

READ ALSO:Why I Resigned From PDP – Atiku

The statement also clarified that authentic information on the former Vice President is only released through his Media Adviser or Special Assistant on Public Communications.

Editors and media gatekeepers are strongly advised to verify with the Atiku Media Office before publication,” the statement added.

Advertisement

It was widely reported on Wednesday that Atiku has assured people of the South-West geo-political zone that their interest would remain central to his policy direction if elected President in 2027, noting that his long-standing marital and cultural ties to the region make him family.

The report quoted a statement by one, Kola Johnson, as saying that the former Vice President spoke during an engagement with select stakeholders.

READ ALSO:2027 Coalition: Atiku, Secondus, Other PDP Leaders Meet In Abuja

Advertisement

The report said Atiku described the people of the South-West as one of the finest species of the human race, noting that his marriage to a Yoruba woman in the 1970s forged a permanent bond between him and the Yorubas.

He dismissed fears of Hausa/Fulani domination under his leadership as unfounded, insisting that the Yoruba were his larger extended family and in-laws.

The former vice president added that his Yoruba connections extend beyond family, as some of his closest friends and associates were from the region.

Advertisement

“In case you don’t know or have forgotten, I was married to my first wife, Titi, a Yoruba woman, in the 70s, and we have four Yoruba children together. She is now over 75 years old, and we are still together.

“Besides, the Yoruba are so sophisticated and highly educated that you can only toy with them at your peril,” Atiku stated. “My Ijesha-born Yoruba wife is more than a wife to me. Aptly put, she is my Jewel of Inestimable value and anybody who knows about my family, even from a distance, can easily tell you this.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

PHOTOS: Atiku, El-Rufai, Tambuwal, Others Attends ADC Meeting In Abuja

Published

on

Former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar on Thursday attended a meeting of the African Democratic Congress coalition leaders in Abuja, alongside several prominent politicians.

Among those present were former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir el-Rufai; ex-Minister of Digital Economy, Isa Pantami; ADC National Chairman and former Senate President, David Mark; former Kwara State governor, Abdulfatai Ahmed; and ex-Sokoto governor, Aminu Tambuwal.

In a post on his official X handle, Atiku described the gathering as part of efforts to resist what he called entrenched interests holding back Nigeria’s development.

READ ALSO:‘We Don’t Monitor Such Record’ —GWR Rejects Nigerian Adult Entertainment Star’s Marathon Sex Attempt

Advertisement

He stated that the meeting was also against the oligarchs who promote poverty and insecurity in the country.

He wrote, “I am currently at the stakeholders meeting of the Coalition African Democratic Congress (ADC) in Abuja. It’s a meeting of the Nigerian people against the oligarchs who promote poverty and insecurity in the land.”

The ADC coalition was adopted in July by opposition politicians as the platform to challenge for power in the 2027 general elections.

Advertisement

The African Democratic Congress, originally formed in 2005 as the Alliance for Democratic Change, later changed its name to ADC and was officially registered by the Independent National Electoral Commission in 2011. The party positioned itself as a centrist alternative to the dominant Peoples Democratic Party and All Progressives Congress.

READ ALSO:ADC Will Take Over Aso Rock, Lagos Govt House In 2027 — Aregbesola

Over the years, it has attracted defectors and reform-minded politicians seeking to build a third force in Nigeria’s political landscape.

Advertisement

Other members of the coalition include former PDP National Chairman, Uche Secondus; 2023 Labour Party presidential candidate, Peter Obi; ex-Minister of Transportation, Rotimi Amaechi; former Minister of Interior, Rauf Aregbesola; former House of Representatives Speaker, Emeka Ihedioha; ex-Kogi Central Senator, Dino Melaye, and a former National Chairman of the APC, Odigie Oyegun.

Continue Reading

Trending