ABUJA – Proceedings in a suit seeking to stop former President Goodluck Jonathan from contesting the 2027 presidential election suffered a setback on Monday after the plaintiff and key defendants failed to appear before the Federal High Court in Abuja.
The matter, instituted by lawyer Johnmary Jideobi before Justice Peter Lifu, could not proceed as neither the plaintiff nor representatives of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) were present in court.
Only counsel to Jonathan, Chief Chris Uche (SAN), appeared when the case was called.
Uche informed the court that the matter had earlier been fixed for hearing at 2 p.m. at the instance of the parties and urged the court to strike out the suit for lack of diligent prosecution.
According to him, the plaintiff’s counsel, Ndubuisi Ukpai, who was present at the last adjourned date, neither appeared in court nor communicated any reason for his absence.
He further argued that the plaintiff himself, who is also a lawyer, failed to appear without explanation, suggesting that they had lost interest in pursuing the matter.
“My Lord, what it means is that they have lost interest in pursuing the suit, particularly after we filed and served our notice of preliminary objection and other processes,” Uche submitted.
The senior advocate noted that since all processes had already been exchanged, the court could either strike out or dismiss the suit, while also awarding substantial costs against the plaintiff.
Justice Lifu subsequently directed the court registrar to confirm whether hearing notices had been served on INEC and the AGF, listed as the second and third defendants respectively.
The registrar confirmed that both parties had not been served.
Following the revelation, the judge held that, in the interest of fair hearing, INEC and the AGF should be given another opportunity to participate in the proceedings.
Uche, however, argued that the two defendants were passive parties in the matter and that striking out the suit would not adversely affect them.
He further requested the court to award N5 million costs against the plaintiff, insisting that every procedural default should attract consequences.
Justice Lifu declined the request and stressed the need to accommodate all parties, particularly INEC, which he described as fundamental to the case.
“Let us give them time. Let this order be served on INEC because INEC is fundamental in this case. Let us listen to INEC in this matter,” the judge said.
The matter was subsequently adjourned until May 15 for definite hearing.
Justice Lifu also ordered that fresh hearing notices be issued and served on the plaintiff, INEC and the AGF, describing it as the final opportunity for the absent parties.
The judge observed that the hearing date had earlier been agreed upon by the plaintiff’s counsel.
Jonathan, through a preliminary objection filed by his legal team, challenged the competence of the suit, arguing that the plaintiff lacked the legal standing to institute the action.
The former president contended that the case was speculative, premature and based on media conjectures since no nomination process or election had taken place.
“The court lacks jurisdiction to entertain hypothetical constitutional questions. The suit constitutes a gross abuse of court process aimed at obtaining a pre-emptive political judgment,” Jonathan argued.
He also maintained that the joinder of INEC and the AGF was merely a jurisdictional strategy.
Jonathan further informed the court that the issues raised had already been settled by an existing judgment of the Federal High Court in Yenagoa.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2102/2025 and filed on October 6, 2025, listed Jonathan as first defendant, while INEC and the AGF were joined as second and third defendants respectively.
