Court Slams Lawyer With ₦1 Million Fine Over Jonathan Eligibility Lawsuit

The Federal High Court in Abuja on Friday criticised lawyer Johnmary Jideobi and his counsel, Ndubuisi Ukpai, over what the court described as negligence in handling a lawsuit aimed at preventing former President Goodluck Jonathanfrom contesting the 2027 presidential election....KINDLY READ THE FULL STORY HERE▶

Presiding judge, Justice Peter Lifu, condemned the conduct of both the plaintiff and his lawyer, describing it as unacceptable, and subsequently ordered Jideobi to pay ₦1 million in costs to the former president.

In his ruling, Justice Lifu noted that although the suit was filed on October 6, 2025, the plaintiff failed to properly serve the Independent National Electoral Commission and the Attorney-General of the Federation, who were listed as the second and third defendants in the matter.

“I have carefully considered all the submissions and applications before the court,” the judge stated, adding that the case clearly carried political implications.

The court further stressed the importance of speedy proceedings in political matters, especially in view of INEC’s election timetable, and ordered the plaintiff to serve all relevant court documents on INEC and the AGF within two hours.

Justice Lifu also expressed displeasure over the repeated absence of both the plaintiff and his lawyer during earlier adjourned sittings, despite the hearing dates being fixed at their own request.

According to the judge, the matter could not proceed because of the plaintiff’s lack of seriousness, noting that as a trained legal practitioner, he ought to understand the importance of diligence in court proceedings.

The judge held that responsibility must come with consequences and therefore awarded ₦1 million in costs against the plaintiff in favour of Jonathan.

Earlier during the proceedings, counsel to the former president, Chief Chris Uche (SAN), urged the court to dismiss the suit entirely, accusing the plaintiff and his counsel of showing disrespect to the judiciary through their repeated absence.

He argued that the plaintiff appeared to be taking the court process lightly while inconveniencing other parties involved in the matter.

During the hearing, Ukpai later arrived in court and apologised for his lateness, explaining that his vehicle had broken down on the way to court.

Following submissions from all parties, Justice Lifu adjourned the case until May 18 for the hearing of pending applications as well as the substantive suit.