Senior Lawyer Dismisses Fresh Suit To Bar Jonathan From 2027 Race

A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Oba Maduabuchi, has stated that the suit filed in the Federal High Court, Abuja to prevent ex-President Goodluck Jonathan from contesting in 2027 is “an abuse of court process.”

The senior lawyer made this known Tuesday, during an interview on Arise TV’s Morning Show.

He said, “An abuse of court process is when you want to relitigate a case or an issue that has already been settled by a court of competent jurisdiction,” he said.

He added that Jonathan’s qualification or disqualification has already been adjudicated in Yenegoa, and since “nobody has taken that issue on appeal … until that judgment is set aside, it remains what the law is.”

Maduabuchi said any party who takes that settled issue to a court of coordinate jurisdiction is simply “abusing the process of the court” and branded such action as one by “a busy body.”

He observed that what controls any situation is the law in force “when the act in issue was done,” asking whether Section 1373 existed in 2010 when Jonathan took the oath of office.

He said the law only came into effect in 2018 and “when Goodluck Jonathan was taking the oath of office … there was no statutory limitation … which could inhibit him from running his constitutionally guaranteed two terms.”

He questioned whether Jonathan swore any oath after the amendment of 1373 and likened attempts to apply a later law earlier to punishing someone under a law that did not exist when the act occurred.

He recalled that judges’ retirement age was formerly 65, then changed to 70, and asked if a judge who had retired just before that change would sue to be reinstated under the new law.

He emphasised that law demands certainty, and noted that “in 2011 and 2010, when Goodluck Jonathan swore the oath … Prohibition of 1372 was not in existence. It was not binding on him.”

He said no “pyrotechnic” argument can breathe existence into a law that did not exist.

He further referenced a case in the Federal Court of Appeal which affirmed that Jonathan had the right to run and one cannot apply retrospective laws to him.