A Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a suit seeking to bar former President Goodluck Jonathan from contesting the 2027 presidential election, effectively clearing the way for him to participate in the polls if he chooses to run.

Justice Peter Lifu, who delivered judgment in the matter, held that the suit instituted by Johnmary Jideobi lacked merit and amounted to an abuse of court process.

The court further ruled that the plaintiff lacked the legal standing to institute the suit, noting that he failed to show how Jonathan’s possible participation in the election directly affected his interest.

Justice Lifu consequently awarded a total cost of N21 million against the plaintiff — N20 million in favour of Jonathan and N1 million in favour of the Attorney General of the Federation.

The judge described the suit as frivolous and a waste of judicial time, particularly after previous courts had already dismissed similar cases on the same subject.

He cited earlier judgments in Andy Solomon v. Jonathan at the Federal High Court and Cyracus Njoku v. Jonathan at the Court of Appeal, aligning with the decisions and stating that he had “nothing else to add.”

Justice Lifu also expressed dismay that the plaintiff and his counsel continued with the suit despite being aware of the earlier judgments.

The suit, filed in October 2025, sought a determination on whether Jonathan remained constitutionally eligible to contest the presidency in 2027.

The plaintiff argued that Jonathan had exhausted the constitutional two-term limit under Sections 1(1), (2), (3) and 137(3) of the 1999 Constitution, having completed the unexpired tenure of late President Umaru Yar’Adua between 2010 and 2011 before serving a full four-year term after winning the 2011 presidential election.

Jideobi had asked the court to restrain Jonathan from presenting himself as a presidential candidate and to stop the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from accepting or publishing his name as a candidate in the 2027 election or any future presidential contest.
The plaintiff also sought an order directing the Attorney General of the Federation to enforce the requested injunctions if granted.

During proceedings, counsel to the plaintiff maintained that Jonathan had served more than twice in office and was therefore constitutionally barred from seeking another term as president.
Jonathan, INEC and the Attorney General of the Federation were listed as defendants in the suit.

President Donald Trump said on Sunday that he has told US negotiators “not to rush into a deal” with Iran, amid anticipation — and mounting criticism — of an agreement to end the war in the Middle East.

“The negotiations are proceeding in an orderly and constructive manner, and I have informed my representatives not to rush into a deal in that time is on our side,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social account.

“The Blockade will remain in full force and effect until an agreement is reached, certified, and signed.”

The United States has imposed a blockade of Iranian ports since April 13 after Tehran virtually halted traffic through the economically vital Strait of Hormuz in response to the US-Israeli attacks on Iran that began February 28.

“Both sides must take their time and get it right,” Trump wrote in the same Truth Social post, while slamming the 2015 nuclear deal that former president Barack Obama agreed with Iran.

“Our relationship with Iran is becoming a much more professional and productive one. They must understand, however, that they cannot develop or procure a Nuclear Weapon or Bomb,” Trump wrote.

While the White House has not released aspects of the deal, Iran Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said Saturday on state television that the two sides were nearing a “a memorandum of understanding, a kind of framework agreement composed of 14 clauses,” in “a trend toward rapprochement.”

Several voices, notably among Republican lawmakers close to Trump, expressed fears of an agreement favorable to Iran as supposed aspects of the deal that began to leak.

According to news outlet Axios, a possible agreement would extend the current ceasefire by 60 days, during which the Strait of Hormuz would be reopened, Iran would freely sell oil, and negotiations would be held on Iran’s nuclear program.

The top Republican senator overseeing defense policy, Roger Wicker, said that agreeing to a “rumored 60-day ceasefire” with Iran would mean, “everything accomplished by Operation Epic Fury would be for naught!”

Fellow Republican senators Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham also voiced opposition to Iran soon gaining benefits such as the ability to sell its oil freely.

“If the result of all that is to be an Iranian regime — still run by Islamists who chant ‘death to America’ — now receiving billions of dollars, being able to enrich uranium & develop nuclear weapons, and having effective control over the Strait of Hormuz, then that outcome would be a disastrous mistake,” Cruz, a Republican from Texas, wrote on X.

Thom Tillis, a Republican senator from North Carolina, said the deal “doesn’t make sense to me.”

“We were told about 11 weeks ago by (Secretary of Defense Pete) Hegseth and the Department of Defense that they had obliterated Iran’s defenses, and it was just a matter of time before we had the nuclear material. Now we’re talking about a posture where we may accept the nuclear material remaining in Iran. How does that make sense at all?” Tillis said on CNN’s “State of the Union” morning program.

AFP