oncerns have been raised over what many senior lawyers and retired judicial officers describe as a troubling pattern of judicial interference in the internal affairs of political parties.
The growing anxiety follows a series of recent court decisions, particularly those linked to the leadership crisis within the African Democratic Congress, which critics argue appear to contradict the clear provisions of the Electoral Act 2026.
At the centre of the debate is Section 83 of the Electoral Act, which explicitly bars courts from entertaining cases relating strictly to the internal affairs of political parties.
Despite this provision, several rulings in recent months have reignited concerns about the judiciary’s role in political disputes, prompting reactions from legal stakeholders and professional bodies
The Nigerian Bar Association had, in a statement on Friday signed by its President, Afam Osigwe (SAN), warned that continued judicial involvement in intra-party matters could undermine democratic principles and erode public confidence in the judiciary
According to the NBA, the recent developments raise serious constitutional and rule-of-law concerns that require urgent attention.
These developments, particularly those arising from the interpretation and potential application of provisions of the Electoral Act 2026, raise serious constitutional, democratic, and rule-of-law concerns that require immediate intervention,” the statement read in part.
The association further criticised what it described as the “disturbing involvement” of lawyers and courts in matters that are expressly excluded from judicial jurisdiction.
“We particularly deprecate the disturbing involvement by lawyers and courts in the internal affairs of political parties despite the clear provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026,” Osigwe stated, referencing Section 83, which stipulates that no court shall entertain suits pertaining to party internal affairs".
Retired justice raises alarm
A retired Justice of the Court of Appeal, who spoke on condition of anonymity, described the trend as a direct violation of the law and warned of its implications for Nigeria’s democratic stability
"The Electoral Act is unambiguous,” he said. “Once a matter pertains strictly to the internal affairs of a political party—whether it involves congresses, leadership tussles, or candidate selection—the courts have no business intervening. Section 83 was deliberately crafted to prevent exactly what we are witnessing today.”
According to the retired jurist, the increasing willingness of some courts to assume jurisdiction in such matters suggests a deeper institutional problem within the judiciary
This is not judicial activism; it is judicial overreach,” he added. “If not urgently addressed, it could delegitimise the judiciary in the eyes of the public.”
He also expressed concern over the growing incidence of conflicting court orders, describing the trend as “embarrassingly frequent” and dangerous for the rule of law
We now see situations where one court grants an order and another court of coordinate jurisdiction sets it aside or issues a contrary order. This creates confusion, encourages forum shopping, and ultimately weakens the rule of law,” he said.
The ex-justice warned that if political actors begin to perceive the judiciary as a tool to secure favourable outcomes, courts could lose their credibility as impartial arbiters
When political actors realise they can shop for favourable judgments, the courts become battlegrounds rather than temples of justice. That is dangerous for democracy,” he added.
SANs back NBA stance
A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Olu Daramola, aligned with the NBA’s position, describing the concerns raised by the association as both legally and logically sound.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/punchng.com/electoral-act-breach-retired-justice-sans-knock-judges-after-nba-outcry/%3famp
Comments
Post a Comment