The Federal High Court in Abuja on Friday rebuked Johnmary Jideobi and his lawyer, Ndubuisi Ukpai, over lack of diligence to pursue the suit filed to stop former President Goodluck Jonathan from contesting in the 2027 presidential election.
Justice Peter Lifu, who described the plaintiff’s and his lawyer’s attitudes as “unacceptable”, awarded a N1 million fine against the plaintiff in favour of the ex-president.
“I have carefully and painstakingly considered all the submissions and prayers of the learners’ counsel in this matter.
“As this court has earlier ruled and ordered, this case has a character of politics.
“I have taken judicial notice of the Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) timetable.
“The duty of this court is to ensure that political cases are given accelerated hearings and disposed of expeditiously.
“In that wise, and as earlier stated, this court reiterates the provisions of the National Judicial Policy in case management.
“I hereby order as follows:
“The plaintiff, who filed this suit on October 6, 2025, and has not deemed it fit to serve, is hereby granted grace of two hours from now, that is, 10:30 am, to serve all the processes to the 2nd and 3rd defendants (INEC and AGF) unfailingly.
“The 2nd and 3rd defendants are hereby ordered to file and serve their responses, if any, before 11am on Monday, the 18th of May, 2026.
“By consent of counsel, this suit is adjourned to May 18, by noon, for definite hearing of the originating summons and all pending applications,” Justice Lifu said.
The judge, who observed that Jideobi filed the suit on Oct. 6, 2025, expressed surprise that he had yet to serve INEC and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), the 2nd and 3rd defendants, six months after.
Besides, he observed that counsel for the ex-president (1st defendant), Chief Chris Uche, SAN, told the court on May 8 when the case came up that they got the information about the suit in the media and decided to file and serve their processes.
The judge equally observed that on May 11, neither Jideobi, who is also a lawyer, nor Ukpai was in court despite fixing the hearing time at 2pm at the instance of the plaintiff’s lawyer on May 5.
He further noted that though Uche asked for a N5 million cost, the request was not granted in the interest of a fair hearing.
“No doubt, cause follows event.
“On May 11, this court refused to grant the 1st defendant’s application for a cost of N5 million but rather made costs in this cause.
“Today, it is crystal clear that the plaintiff did not serve the originating summons to the 2nd and 3rd defendants since October 6, 2025.
“This case is for hearing today, and the hearing has been frustrated or aborted due to the tardiness of the plaintiff, who is a lawyer by training and calling.
“Hearing cannot go on now as an event.
“Consequently, I hold that punishment should lie where the fault is.
“I hereby award the cost of N1 million against the plaintiff but in favour of the 1st defendant only. I so ruled,” Justice Lifu said.
Earlier when the case was called on Friday, neither Jideobi nor Ukpai was in court again.
However, the lawyer to the former president, Uche, and the AGF’s counsel, J. D. Esho, were in court.
Justice Lifu then asked the registrar to confirm from the court record if the plaintiff and INEC were served with hearing notices, which she did.
The former president’s lawyer, therefore, applied that the case be dismissed with substantial cost due to the plaintiff’s continued absence in court.
Uche said the plaintiff and his lawyer did not see the reason to either write to the court or the defendants on why they would not be in court.
The senior lawyer said Jideobi and Ukpai, in their manner, had portrayed absolute disdain and disrespect to the court.
He expressed surprise that the plaintiff, who initiated the suit, dragged a former Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces of the country to court for nothing and abandoned the case.
Uche said despite getting the news about the case in the media, the former president filed all his processes, including a preliminary objection, and served the same on the plaintiff.
“The plaintiff thinks he can hold the court and other parties to ransom and stay back in the comfort of his house and drag all of us to court,” he said.
According to him, there must be a consequence for every action.
“They think the courts are toothless bulldogs, and the dignity of the court must be protected, my lord,” he said.
Uche, therefore, urged the court to invoke its disciplinary power on the plaintiff and dismiss the case as being an abuse of court process.
AGF’s lawyer, Esho, who told the court that her office was served with the ex-president’s response to the suit on May 11, said they were yet to be served with the originating summons from the plaintiff.
The registrar also confirmed that though INEC was served with a hearing notice of today’s sitting, the commission had not also been served with the plaintiff’s processes.
Midway into the case, Ukpai entered the court and apologised for his lateness.
“My lord, I am sorry. I am for the plaintiff. Our vehicle broke down on the way,” he begged.
After taking submissions from all the lawyers, the judge adjourned the matter until May 18 for a definite hearing of all pending applications and the substantive suit at 12noon. (NAN)
