Jonathan and Nigeria’s political wonderland, by Dele Sobowale

The hypothetical nomination of former President Goodluck Jonathan for the Nigerian presidency in 2026 by a faction of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) raises critical legal questions concerning constitutional term limits and the regulatory framework for political parties. This article examines the interplay of Section 137(3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), which restricts former presidents who completed another's term from serving more than a single elected term, and judicial interpretations on its retroactivity. It further explores the implications of party factionalism and the Independent National Electoral Commission's (INEC) powers under the Electoral Act 2026 regarding candidate eligibility and party recognition, highlighting the complex legal hurdles such a candidacy would face.

At the heart of this legal inquiry lies the interpretation and application of Section 137(3) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), a provision specifically designed to clarify the tenure of individuals who assume the presidency to complete an unexpired term. Coupled with this is the challenge posed by a nomination emanating from a 'faction of a moribund party,' which brings into play the powers and responsibilities of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) under the Electoral Act 2026. This article will dissect these legal complexities, drawing on relevant constitutional provisions, statutory instruments, and judicial pronouncements to provide a comprehensive analysis for legal practitioners navigating Nigeria's evolving electoral jurisprudence.

Former President Goodluck Jonathan's political trajectory is directly impacted by this provision. He first assumed the presidency in May 2010 to complete the unexpired term of the late President Umaru Musa Yar'Adua and subsequently won the 2011 presidential election, serving a full four-year term until 2015. Therefore, he has been sworn in twice as President: once to complete a term and once for a full elected term. The Electoral Act 2026, which supersedes the Electoral Act 2022, governs the conduct of elections, including the nomination of candidates by political parties. Section 84 of the Electoral Act 2026 outlines the procedures for party primaries (direct, indirect, or consensus) and mandates INEC's monitoring of these processes. Political parties are required to submit their list of candidates to INEC not later than 180 days before the general election. INEC also has the mandate to regulate political parties, including their operations and conventions, and to ensure compliance with constitutional and electoral laws.

Beyond constitutional eligibility, the article's excerpt highlights a nomination by a "faction of the moribund Peoples Democratic Party." This raises serious questions about the legitimacy of the nominating entity and the validity of the nomination itself. Under the Electoral Act 2026, INEC is empowered to monitor the organization and operation of political parties, including their conventions, congresses, and party primaries. INEC's regulations require political parties to conduct valid primaries and submit lists of candidates who emerged from such primaries. The Commission has historically declined to recognize party factions, especially when there are ongoing legal disputes regarding party leadership or structure, emphasizing compliance with court orders. A nomination from a faction, particularly one of a "moribund" party, would likely face intense scrutiny from INEC, which would need to ascertain the faction's legal standing and its compliance with the party's constitution and the Electoral Act 2026. Any deviation could lead to the rejection of the candidate's nomination, as INEC is no longer prohibited from rejecting unqualified candidates.

For legal practitioners, this scenario underscores the imperative of meticulous adherence to constitutional provisions and electoral laws, particularly concerning candidate eligibility and party internal democracy. Future litigation on such matters will likely continue to test the boundaries of constitutional interpretation and the regulatory oversight of INEC. Practitioners must advise their clients on the robust requirements for valid party primaries and the potential for disqualification based on constitutional term limits or non-compliance with electoral procedures, even in the face of favorable lower court rulings, as such matters often proceed to appellate courts. The ongoing evolution of Nigeria's electoral jurisprudence demands constant vigilance and a deep understanding of both the letter and spirit of the law.