Politics

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

Published

1 year ago

September 2, 2025

Editor

As the possibility of former President Goodluck Jonathan contesting the 2027 presidential election continues to heat up political discussions, a previously unpublished judgment delivered by a Federal High Court in Yenagoa, Bayelsa State, affirmed that Jonathan was well qualified to contest presidential election.

Two members of the APC in Bayelsa had gone to court in 2022 to determine Jonathan’s position, given the high stakes northern lobby to mobilise Jonathan to replace late President Muhammadu Buhari before the now President Tinubu eventually clinched the APC ticket.

Aides to the former President said he is still consulting on whether to throw his hat in the ring for 2027.

Sources close to the former President told THISDAY last night, that he has been approached by three political parties each wanting him to contest the presidency on their platforms. The Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, the New Nigeria Peoples Party, NNPP and the recently formed coalition, the African Democratic Congress, ADC all jostling for the former President who many see as one of the most viable candidates that can give the incumbent President Bola Ahmed Tinubu a good run for his money.

This calculation is based on the fact that Jonathan can only legally seek one more term and could assuage the feelings of northern voters who accuse President Tinubu of marginalisation.

A claim that the presidency has vigorously denied.

The judgment delivered by Justice Isah Dashem of the Federal High Court, Yenagoa, on May 27, 2022 but obtained by THISDAY on Monday, put to rest the contentious constitutional amendment of Section 137(1)(b) and 3, as it affects Jonathan.

Various analysts led by the Minister of Aviation and Aerospace Development and Learned Silk, Festus Keyamo, had claimed that the PDP may put its presidential chances in 2027 at “risk” should they field Jonathan going by the provisions of the above section from the amended Constitution in 2018. However, Keyamo did not disclose or was unaware of the judgement of Justice Dashem.

The judgment, which has not been appealed or set aside remains subsisting. And it is now out of time for any appeal after 3 years since it was delivered In the 2022 suit with number: FHC/YNG/CS/86/2022, the two APC members sued Jonathan, APC and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), over rumour that the APC had planned to field the former president as its presidential candidate in the 2023 general elections.

Their grouse was that Jonathan’s participation would ruin the chances of the APC having taking oath of office twice as president.

The sole issue raised for determination was “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 Jonathan had earlier been sworn-in as the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in 2010 and 2011 respectively, whether he 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.”

The plaintiffs, Andy Solomon and Idibiye Abraham, through their lawyer, Seigha Egbuwabe, further urged that if the answer to (1) above was in the negative, then the court should determine “Whether the no 2” Defendant was entitled to field the 1st Defendant as its Presidential Candidate in the 2023 General Elections.”

The court was also to determine, “Whether the 3rd Defendant is entitled to disqualify the 1st Defendant from contesting and/or from being presented as the 2nd Defendant Presidential Candidate in the 2023 General Elections.”

Dashem, after taking arguments from plaintiffs’ lawyer and Jonathan, who was represented by Eric Omare, held that Jonathan was eminently qualified to contest in 2023.

Before arriving at the conclusion, Dashem observed that Jonathan was elected first as president in 2011.

“The office into which the ‘election’ stated in Section 137(1)(b) of the Constitution applies to the Office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and not into the Office of the Vice President. I have perused the entirety of the Plaintiffs supporting affidavit and Written Address and I am unable to find where the Plaintiffs referred this Court contested apart from the elections conducted in year 2011.

“I, therefore, find the Plaintiffs’ contention that the 1st Defendant has been elected to the Office of President on Two (2) previous occasions spurious, baseless and unsubstantiated.

“And I so hold.”

He clarified that although elections into the offices of President and Vice President were conducted simultaneously and upon a joint ticket submitted by a political party, such as the 2nd Defendant, to the 3rd Defendant, the positions of President and Vice President were two different offices.

According to the judge, election of a person, such as the 1st Defendant, into the Office of the Vice President is not the same as his election into the Office of the President and vice-versa.

The judge stated, “A person who is elected into the Office of Vice President cannot by virtue of such election simpliciter, occupy the position of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. I so hold.

“As I have noted above, the Plaintiff did not file a Reply Affidavit to dispute the facts contained in paragraphs 4(i) — (y) of the 1st Defendant’s Counter Affidavit. The legal implication of this failure is that the contentions of the 1st Defendant are deemed to be true.

“In the final analysis, I find that, the evidence before this Court points to the conclusion that the 1st Defendant has only been elected into the Office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on one (1) previous occasion, which said occasion was in the General Elections conducted in year 2011. And I so hold.”

On the provisions of Section 137(3) of the Constitution, Dashem stated that Jonathan was sworn in as president in 2010, to complete the tenure of late President Umaru Yar’Adua and again in 2011, after he won the 2011 presidential election.

He agreed with Jonathan’s submissions that the said provisions, which sought to bar persons who completed another’s tenure from contesting twice, did not apply to him because the law was passed in 2018, when he already had the right to contest and contested in the 2015, general elections.

Dashem said, “As I have held above, the provisions of sub-Section (3) of Section 137 of the Constitution was not part of our Constitution prior to June 7, 2018, when same took effect. It, therefore, follows that the provisions of sub-section (3) was not the position of our law at all material times before June 7, 2018. It also follows that, prior to June 7, 2018, no restriction was placed on the number of times a person who was sworn-in to complete the term of office of a President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria can be re-elected into that Office.

“The 1st Defendant has argued that, since he acquired his right to contest and, if successful, be sworn-in as President after he lost his re-election bid, in 2025, to the current President – President Muhammadu Buhari it would be unethical to the spirit and intendment of the legislature to take away the right he acquired in year 2015 on the basis of a law that came into effect in 2018.

“Now, the position of the law on retroactive or retrospective application of laws is quite settled. Retroactive laws are which relate or cover matters or acts which occurred before its commencement date.”

The judge added, “Despite my best efforts, I fail to see where the legislature expressed their intention, by express and unequivocal words, that the provisions of subsection (3) of Section 137 of the Constitution should be accorded retrospective application.

“In the absence of such express words, I am constrained to hold that the provisions of Section 137(3) do not enjoy retrospective application. The application and enforceability of the said subsection can only be construed to apply with effect from June 7, 2018. And I so hold.

“In my opinion, the position being propounded by the 1st Defendant is not only tenable but accords with the position of the law. It is the duty of the Plaintiffs to point or direct this Court to where the legislature stated that the provisions of Section 137(3) of the Constitution apply to events and/or rights which have been acquired and/or have been vested in parties prior to June 7, 2018.

“The law is that, he who asserts must prove. See, Section 131(1) of the Evidence Act, 2011. It therefore, behoved the Plaintiffs to provide this Court with facts to support their case. In the absence of such proof, I find that the Plaintiffs have not discharged the burden of proof placed on them by law.

“I, therefore, find merit in the argument of the 1st Defendant that the introduction of sub-section (3) of Section 137 of the Constitution does not affect his right to contest for the Office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in the 2023 General Elections and be sworn-in as such, should he be victorious at the polls.

“As I have noted above, before, in year 2015 when the 1st Defendant lost his re-election bid into the Office of the President, the restriction imposed by subsection (3) to Section 137 was not in existence. This is why the 1st Defendant despite having been sworn-in as President on May 6, 2010 and May 29, 2011, was able to contest for the Office of the President in the 2015 General Elections.

“Had the 1st Defendant been victorious at the 2015 polls, he would have been sworn-in for a third time without any legal impediment. Therefore, the 1st Defendant acquired his right to contest for the Office of the President immediately his term as President ended on May 29, 2015. Clearly, it is incontrovertible that the Ist Defendant’s right to contest and be sworn-in as President accrued to and was vested in him on May 29, 2015. And I so hold.

“In the final analysis, I answer Question 1 formulated by the Plaintiffs in their Originating Summons in the affirmative.

“I declare that, the provisions of Section 137(3) of the Constitution acquired the force of law with effect from June 7, 2018 and same does not have retrospective application.

“I also declare that, the 1st Defendant is not disqualified by the provisions of Section 137(1)(b) and (3) of the Constitution from contesting for election into the Office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in the 2023 General Elections.

“Having answered Question 1 in the affirmative, the necessity to answer Questions 2 and 3 have been obviated. However, for the avoidance of doubt, I answer Question 2 in the affirmative also whilst I answer Question 3 in the negative.

“In the final analysis, I answer questions 1 and 2 posed in the Originating Summons in favour of the 1st Defendant and question 3 in the negative and therefore against the 3rd Defendant.

“Consequently, I enter Judgement for the I Defendant and all the reliefs sought by the Plaintiffs in their Originating Summons dated May 16, 2022 (but filed on May 17, 2022) fail and are all hereby dismissed.”
Source: Arise News

Politics

2027: Why I’m Supporting Tinubu’s Re-election — Alex Otti

Published

7 hours ago

September 25, 2026

Editor

Abia State Governor Alex Otti has said his position as governor and member of the National Economic Council leaves him with no choice but to support President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s bid for re-election in 2027, even though he belongs to the opposition Labour Party (LP).

Speaking in an exclusive interview aired on Arise Television on Friday, Otti was asked whether his backing for Tinubu amounted to a “comfortable arrangement” between him and the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). He agreed with the characterisation, saying he was not in a position to oppose the President’s candidacy.

“It works the way you have said. It’s a statement of fact. I am not in a position to oppose his candidacy,” Otti said.

The governor explained that being part of government came with obligations that ruled out open opposition to Tinubu, warning that such a stance could trigger “implosion” within the system he serves.

“And sometimes people don’t understand the opposition. When you say opposition, and you are part of a government, then what you are driving towards is implosion.

“So if I do have a problem with anything, I’ll sit down in one of our meetings and I’ll make my point. So I’m not going to oppose his candidacy,” he added.

He said his role on the National Economic Council effectively tied him to decisions taken by the Federal Government, leaving him little room to distance himself from Tinubu’s re-election project.

“I had also said that as a governor in this republic, that a lot of the things that are being, in fact, I’m part of all the things that have been done as a member of National Economic Council. So, we should distinguish that.

“When somebody now says, ‘Oh, you are supporting or you’re not,’ I have to support him,” he said.

Pressed further on whether he was supporting Tinubu for re-election, Otti pointed to earlier remarks in which he said he still had a presidential candidate for the Labour Party. When the interviewer suggested Tinubu was that candidate, he pushed back.

“No, that’s not what I said,” he said.

Asked to clarify whether he meant a Labour Party presidential candidate, Otti replied, “Yes.” Returned to the question of his support for Tinubu, he responded: “What do you expect me to say? To say I’m not supporting him?”

Otti maintained that Tinubu had every right to contest the 2027 election, and noted that several of the President’s policies aligned with positions he had long held himself, pointing to the removal of the fuel subsidy as an example.

“Quit frankly, there are a lot of things that we have talked about now, that he has implemented, that resonate with me and my thinking.

“People don’t have to agree with me, but from where I sit, I know that for instance, the fuel subsidy was even unsustainable,” Otti said.

Politics

Crisis Rocks NDC Over Obi-Kwankwaso Campaign Council

Published

4 days ago

September 21, 2026

Editor

A fresh crisis appears to be brewing within the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) following a sharp disagreement between the party’s National Chairman, Senator Cleopas Moses, and the OK Movement over the latter’s role and independence ahead of the 2027 general elections.

The OK Movement, in a statement signed by its National Secretary, Saadatu Sani, accused the NDC National Chairman of making statements it described as defamatory and reflective of a misunderstanding of the movement’s structure, independence and constitutional foundation.

The statement followed a recent publication attributed to Moses concerning the movement and the involvement of its National Director General, Hon. John Ughulu, in the Lagos State primaries.

The OK Movement had, on Thursday, unveiled a 59-member presidential campaign council ahead of the 2027 general elections. Cleopas, however, on Saturday, dissociated itself from the porported campaign council.

The OK Movement urged the NDC chairman to familiarise himself with the party’s constitution before making assertions about the rights, responsibilities and independence of political movements associated with the party.

“Leadership is ultimately measured by knowledge, restraint, integrity and respect for established rules, not by insults, personal attacks or defamatory assertions,” the statement said.

The movement stressed that its support for the NDC and its candidates did not make it subject to the personal approval of any individual within the party.

According to the statement, the OK Movement recognises the supremacy of political parties within their constitutional and statutory sphere and intends to campaign for the NDC’s presidential and vice-presidential candidates, as well as other party candidates across the country in areas where it has resolved to support them.

However, it maintained that it remained an independent political organisation with its own leadership, organisational structure, ideology and internal processes.

“We will campaign for the presidential and vice presidential candidates of the party,” the statement said.

“We will campaign for candidates of the NDC Party across the country where the movement has resolved to support them. But we do not require the personal validation or approval of any individual before exercising our legitimate organisational functions,” it added.

The movement further rejected suggestions that its activities were driven by the pursuit of political appointments or positions within the party.

It said the organisation was built from the grassroots and did not depend on the sponsorship of any individual or political office holder.

The OK Movement also claimed to have approximately 2.5 million registered members and coordinators in its internal database, describing itself as a long-term political movement rather than a temporary support group established for an election cycle.

The organisation said its objective was to mobilise Nigerians around demands for improved governance, economic opportunity, accountability and citizen-centred development.

Politics

Why I Lent Peter Obi My Vehicle During Benue Visit — Ortom

Published

2 weeks ago

September 13, 2026

Editor

Former Benue Governor, Samuel Ortom, has explained why he lent his vehicle to the presidential candidate of the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC), Peter Obi, during the latter’s recent visit to the state.

Ortom, through his media aide, Terver Akase, said he decided to assist Obi with transportation as a matter of courtesy, stressing that refusing to help a former governor and presidential candidate would have been “petty” and unbecoming of a former governor.

Obi had visited Benue last Tuesday as part of plans to meet victims and families affected by the June 2025 massacre in Yelewata.

However, his planned movement from Makurdi to Yelewata was disrupted after youths reportedly blocked his convoy around Gyado Villa, a few kilometres from the airport.

Following the incident, Governor Hyacinth Alia’s Chief Press Secretary, Kula Tersoo, alleged that Ortom was involved in facilitating Obi’s visit.

Tersoo said a state government investigation traced the vehicle used to convey Obi from Makurdi Airport to Ortom.

He identified the vehicle as a Toyota Land Cruiser with registration number GWA 608 BT, claiming that Federal Road Safety Corps records showed it was registered in Ortom’s name and linked to his Judges Quarters address in Makurdi.

The governor’s aide also questioned why Ortom, who has declared support for President Bola Tinubu ahead of the 2027 presidential election, would provide his vehicle to Obi.

But Ortom dismissed the suggestion that lending his vehicle to Peter Obi amounted to political collaboration.

He said Obi, as a former governor and presidential candidate, deserved basic courtesy while visiting the state on what he described as a humanitarian mission.

“Peter Obi is a former governor, a presidential candidate and one of the most prominent political figures in the country,” he said.

Ortom added that refusing to assist Obi would have been viewed as “petty, inhospitable and beneath the dignity of a former governor.”

He described attempts to politicise the gesture as “ridiculous and shameful”, accusing the Alia administration of creating controversy around what he called a “humane, courteous and statesmanlike gesture.”

Ortom also rejected claims that his action made him “double-faced”, noting that although he supported Obi in 2023, he had since publicly declared his support for Tinubu in the 2027 presidential election.