Oba Maduabuchi, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), has faulted the suit filed at the Federal High Court in Abuja seeking to stop former President Goodluck Jonathan from contesting in the 2027 presidential election, describing it as “a waste of judicial time.”
The suit was filed on Monday by lawyer Johnmary Jideobi, who is seeking an order to bar Jonathan from participating in the 2027 race. But speaking on Tuesday during an interview on Arise TV’s Morning Show, Maduabuchi dismissed the case as “an abuse of court process,” arguing that the issue of Jonathan’s qualification to contest had already been decided by a court of competent jurisdiction.
“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 explained that Jonathan’s eligibility had previously been determined by a Federal High Court in Yenagoa, Bayelsa State, adding that the judgment remains valid until overturned by a higher court.
“Since nobody has taken that issue on appeal, until that judgment is set aside, it remains what the law is,” Maduabuchi said.
The senior lawyer criticized attempts to reopen the matter, saying that any party bringing the same issue before another court of equal status is “abusing the process of the court” and acting like “a busybody.”
He further stressed that the applicable law in any case is the one in force “when the act in issue was done,” questioning whether Section 137(3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) existed in 2010 when Jonathan first took the oath of office.
“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 stated.
Maduabuchi argued that since Jonathan never took any oath after the 2018 amendment, applying the later law retroactively would be unconstitutional. He drew a comparison with the change in the retirement age of judges from 65 to 70 years, noting that a judge who had retired before the change “cannot sue to be reinstated under the new law.”
“Law demands certainty,” he emphasized, adding that “in 2010 and 2011, when Goodluck Jonathan swore the oath, Section 137(3) was not in existence and therefore not binding on him.”
He dismissed any attempt to reinterpret the law using what he called “pyrotechnic argument,” saying, “You cannot breathe existence into a law that did not exist.”
The senior advocate also cited a previous Court of Appeal ruling affirming Jonathan’s right to contest, insisting that no law can be applied retrospectively to disqualify the former president.
