Abuse of court process’ – SAN dismisses suit on Jonathan’s qualification for 2027 election
A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, SAN, Oba Maduabuchi, has described the suit filed at the Federal High Court, Abuja, challenging the eligibility of former President Goodluck Jonathan to contest the 2027 presidential election as an abuse of court process.
Speaking on Arise Television’s Morning Show on Tuesday, Maduabuchi said the issue of Jonathan’s qualification had already been settled by a competent court in Yenagoa, Bayelsa State, and no appeal has been filed against that judgment.
He stated that until the existing judgment is overturned, it remains the valid legal position, adding that anyone attempting to relitigate the matter is “simply abusing the process of the court and is a busy body”.
The senior lawyer explained that the 2018 constitutional amendment — Section 137(3), which limits a person to one further term if they have previously completed another’s tenure — did not exist when Jonathan first took the oath of office in 2010 following the death of President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua.
Maduabuchi maintained that the law cannot be applied retroactively and that there was no legal restriction preventing Jonathan from seeking two full terms as President under the constitutional provisions in effect at the time.
He said: “Let me start by saying that that suit in the Federal High Court Abuja is an abuse of court process.
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.
“The issue of the qualification or non-qualification of Dr Goodluck Jonathan have been settled by the court in Yenagoa. Nobody has taken that issue on appeal. And until that judgment is set aside, it remains what the law is, and anybody who decides that he wants to take it to a court of coordinate jurisdiction is simply abusing the process of the court and is a busy body.
“But what controls a given situation is the position of the law when the act in the issue was done. What was the position of the law in 2011?
