BY CHIJIOKE CHARLES
A Federal High Court has threatened to award costs against the plaintiffs in the suit challenging the eligibility of former President Goodluck Jonathan to contest future presidential elections after the parties failed to appear in court for the second consecutive time.
At the resumed hearing on Monday, neither the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) nor the plaintiff that instituted the case was represented before the court, prompting concerns from the judge over the repeated absence of the parties driving the matter.
Counsel to Jonathan urged the court to strike out the suit for lack of diligent prosecution, arguing that the continued non-appearance of the plaintiffs suggested a loss of interest in pursuing the case.
However, the judge declined the request, insisting that the court must first exhaust the principles of fair hearing before taking such a drastic step.
The court subsequently warned that it could impose costs against the plaintiffs if they fail to appear again, stressing that judicial time should not be wasted through unnecessary delays and repeated adjournments.
“In the interest of fair hearing,” the judge ruled, the plaintiffs should be served with hearing notices “one last time” before any further decision is taken on the matter.
The case was thereafter adjourned till Friday, May 15, 2026, for continuation.
The suit centres on the constitutional debate over whether Jonathan, who completed the tenure of late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua before winning a fresh election in 2011, remains eligible to seek another term in office under Nigeria’s amended constitutional provisions.
The repeated absence of the plaintiffs could weaken the momentum of the case and potentially open the door for its dismissal if the parties fail to prosecute it diligently at the next adjourned date.
Legal observers say the outcome may have broader political implications ahead of future electoral calculations, especially amid recurring speculations over Jonathan’s possible return to active presidential politics.
