Experts Warn Nigeria's Courts Risk Undermining Popular Sovereignty

Concerns regarding the expanding influence of the judiciary in determining electoral outcomes dominated recent discussions in Lagos. At the third edition of the Tunji Braithwaite Symposium, prominent legal and political figures warned that excessive judicial intervention could erode public confidence in the electoral process. According to Business News Nigeria, the debate centered on whether courts are increasingly acting as arbiters of political mandates rather than mere dispute resolvers.

The symposium, organized by the Tunji Braithwaite Foundation, brought together former officials and retired judges to examine the role of the judiciary ahead of the 2027 general elections. Speakers argued that while courts have a legitimate constitutional duty to interpret electoral laws, the current trend risks replacing voters as the ultimate source of political authority. The discussion highlighted a growing tension between legal proceduralism and the fundamental principle of popular sovereignty enshrined in the 1999 Constitution.

Judicial intervention challenges democratic mandate

Chidi Odinkalu, former chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, delivered the keynote address focusing on the implications of evolving electoral jurisprudence. He argued that judicial decisions are increasingly altering election results, sometimes effectively determining who receives the mandate to govern. Odinkalu noted that Section 14(2)(a) of the Constitution establishes that sovereignty resides with the people, a principle that is threatened when courts appear to expropriate the citizens' role in selecting their leaders.

Odinkalu contended that the logic of democratic government relies on citizens conferring, renewing, or withdrawing mandates through elections. When this process is disrupted by legal maneuvers, the stability of constitutional government is endangered. He emphasized that his criticism was not an indictment of all judges, many of whom remain committed to their duties, but rather a call to address a systemic issue in how election petitions are handled.

Lawyers' skills overshadow voter arithmetic

A significant portion of the discussion focused on the growing power of litigation in the electoral cycle. Odinkalu observed that the ability of lawyers to navigate procedural rules is becoming more consequential than the actual arithmetic of votes cast at polling units. He warned that if elections are settled based on the drafting of pleadings or their traversal, the process becomes perverse and ceases to function as a genuine expression of the popular will.

Mike Igini, a former Resident Electoral Commissioner of the Independent National Electoral Commission, echoed these concerns. He stated that it is now often the courts that determine the winners of elections, a shift that undermines the integrity of the democratic process. The speakers urged a reevaluation of how pre-election and post-election cases are managed to ensure that legal procedures do not override the fundamental outcome of the ballot.

Safeguarding integrity before 2027 elections

The symposium concluded with a call for measures to safeguard free, fair, and credible elections in the lead-up to 2027. Participants stressed that constitutional institutions must strengthen democracy rather than weaken it by restricting popular participation. The forward question remains how the judiciary will balance its constitutional powers with the need to respect the direct expression of the electorate's choice in the upcoming general election cycle.