•Yusuf Olaolu Ali, SAN
Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Yusuf Olaolu Ali, has called on the National Assembly to remove the powers of courts to declare winners in election petitions.
He said such powers erode the essence of democracy and undermine the sovereignty of the electorate, reports Daily Trust.
The senior lawyer disclosed this in Ilorin while speaking on the ongoing move by the National Assembly to amend the Electoral Act.
He described the timing as appropriate as Nigeria prepares for the 2027 general elections and a possible transition in the leadership of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
Ali said it was time for lawmakers to take a bold step to strengthen the democratic process by ensuring that the people, not the judiciary, determine who governs them.
He stressed that when an election petition succeeds in court, the proper course of action should be to return the process to the voters for a fresh mandate, rather than allowing judges to declare any candidate winner.
According to him, most of the negative public perceptions of the judiciary stem from its involvement in electoral disputes, where judges are often accused of determining political outcomes.
He said this has led to unwarranted criticisms and suspicion of judicial integrity, which could have been avoided if courts were not empowered to announce winners in contentious elections.
“The most problematic issue in our electoral process is the power given to the courts and tribunals to declare winners after nullifying an election. Once a petition succeeds, it should go back to the electorate. That is the only way we can sustain the true spirit of democracy,” he said.
Ali explained that the power of declaring a winner after judicial proceedings, as contained in Section 136 of the Electoral Act, should be expunged.
He argued that when judges overturn election results and impose candidates who were not elected by the people, it contradicts the democratic principle of popular sovereignty and exposes the judiciary to political manipulation.
He said: “When 25 million people have voted, three or five judges should not have the power to set aside their will and declare someone else the winner. That power should be removed, and the people should be allowed to vote again. You will be surprised that the number of election petitions will drop drastically once that is done.”
The Senior Advocate also faulted the practice of courts interfering in internal political party matters such as nominations, saying the judiciary should stay away from deciding who emerges as a party candidate.
“If a political party decides to mistreat a member, such a person can leave for another party. The courts should not impose candidates on political parties. That is part of what has contributed to the loss of public confidence in the judiciary,” he added.
Ali maintained that the only way to safeguard Nigeria’s democratic system is to insulate the judiciary from political pressures and allow it to focus on its primary duties of settling disputes between individuals, commercial entities, and governments.
He added that freeing the judiciary from electoral burdens would restore confidence in the courts and reduce allegations of corruption against judges.
He said while some may argue that conducting repeat elections would be costly, it remains a necessary investment in democratic stability and legitimacy.
“No amount of money is too much to sustain democracy. The alternative is anarchy, which is far more expensive,” he said.
Ali also backed the call for greater transparency in the electoral process through electronic transmission of results. He said that where discrepancies occur between transmitted and physical results, the entire election should be cancelled and conducted afresh to eliminate manipulation and ensure the integrity of the vote.
The Senior Advocate’s comments came amid the National Assembly’s ongoing public hearing on the proposed amendment of the Electoral Act.
Lawmakers are considering sweeping reforms ahead of the 2027 polls.
Among the proposals before the committees are early conduct of elections, time limits for the resolution of petitions before swearing-in, mandatory electronic transmission of results, and penalties for political parties that submit false documents among others.
