The growing influence of the judiciary in Nigeria's elections has sparked concerns among experts, who warn that excessive judicial intervention could undermine democratic sovereignty and citizens' confidence in the electoral process. At the third edition of the Tunji Braithwaite Symposium in Lagos, speakers, including Chidi Odinkalu, Mike Igini, and Oludotun Adefope-Okojie, argued that courts should resolve genuine electoral disputes without effectively replacing voters as the ultimate arbiters of political mandates.
The symposium, themed "The Judiciary & Electoral Integrity in Nigeria: Safeguarding Free, Fair & Credible Elections for Democratic Consolidation," examined the role of the judiciary ahead of the 2027 general elections. Odinkalu, who delivered the keynote address, argued that the development of electoral jurisprudence in Nigeria had increasingly allowed judicial decisions to alter electoral outcomes and, in some cases, effectively determine who receives the mandate to govern.
Odinkalu questioned whether popular sovereignty remained meaningful when courts could "expropriate and confiscate" from citizens their constitutional role to determine who should receive the mandate to rule. He cited Section 14(2)(a) of the 1999 Constitution, which establishes that sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria, and international democratic instruments that recognise popular participation through universal suffrage as a fundamental basis for government.
The increasing importance of litigation before and after elections has created a system in which the ability of lawyers to navigate procedural rules could become more consequential than the arithmetic of votes cast at polling units, Odinkalu said. He noted that election-related disputes were no longer limited to conventional post-election petitions, pointing to the growing significance of pre-election cases in determining who eventually occupies political office.
Mike Igini, a former Resident Electoral Commissioner of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), said the judiciary's growing role in determining election outcomes had become a major concern for Nigeria's democracy. Igini argued that the ballot should remain the principal means through which citizens express their will, and that the judiciary was expected to serve as the last line of defence for democracy and the rule of law.
Oludotun Adefope-Okojie, a retired judge, criticised the use of legal technicalities to overturn election outcomes, saying that many electoral disputes were rooted in the failure of political parties to respect internal democracy. She expressed concern over cases where candidates who won elections were subsequently displaced through technical interpretations of electoral laws, and called for an end to such practices.
The Tunji Braithwaite Foundation has called for reforms ahead of the 2027 elections, with OlaOluwa Braithwaite, executive director, saying that the symposium was convened to interrogate the capacity, independence, and public trust of the judiciary. The foundation seeks to diagnose weaknesses and develop practical recommendations to ensure that elections are not won in courtrooms rather than at polling units.
Key points
- The judiciary's growing influence on Nigeria's elections threatens popular sovereignty and citizens' confidence in the electoral process.
- Experts argue that courts should resolve genuine electoral disputes without effectively replacing voters as the ultimate arbiters of political mandates.
- The use of legal technicalities to overturn election outcomes has been criticised, with calls for an end to such practices to ensure that the will of the people prevails.
