Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court, Abuja, has rebuked Johnmary Jideobi, the plaintiff, and his lawyer, Ndubuisi Ukpai, over a lack of diligence in pursuing the suit filed, seeking to stop former President Goodluck Jonathan from contesting the 2027 presidential election.
Justice Lifu, who described the plaintiff’s and his lawyer’s attitudes, which had continued to stall proceedings in the case, as “unacceptable”, awarded a N1 million fine against the plaintiff in favour of the ex-president.
The judge, who observed that Jideobi filed the suit on October 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 later.
Besides, he observed that counsel for the ex-president, 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 2 pm 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.
Earlier, when the case was called on Friday, neither Jideobi nor Ukpai was in court.
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 costs 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; 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 of the plaintiff.
The registrar also confirmed that though INEC was served with a hearing notice of Friday’s sitting, the commission had not been served with the plaintiff’s process.
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.
