Former President, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan’s reported 2027 presidential ambition, was, yesterday, caught in the web of muscle-flexing by the two blocs battling for the soul of Peoples Democratic Party, PDP.

The rival camps clashed over Jonathan’s place in the party’s unfolding 2027 calculations, after reports that he could purchase a presidential nomination form before the close of the day.

This was as proceedings in the suit challenging Jonathan’s eligibility to contest the 2027 presidential election took a new turn amid allegations of bias against the presiding judge, yesterday.

The PDP bloc loyal to Federal Capital Territory, FCT, Minister, Mr Nyesom Wike, will stop selling of nomination forms today, while the Kabiru Turaki-led Interim National Working Committee, INWC, will stop selling forms on May 13, with deadline for submission of completed forms fixed for May 14.

Interestingly, while the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, recognised the Wike-backed camp, the Turaki team is said to have the party’s membership register, which it said it had submitted to the electoral commission.

The Wike camp also said it had submitted its membership register to INEC. Efforts to get clarification from the electoral umpire on the issue and parties that had submitted their membership registers on or before the May 10 deadline were yet to bear fruit at press time last night.

At the weekend, nine groups supportive of Jonathan’s return to power were said to be mobilising to buy the PDP N100million expression of interest and nomination forms for the former ruler.

At press time, however, Jonathan was yet to obtain any form from either of the rival PDP leadership blocs, deepening uncertainty over his political intentions and exposing the widening divisions within the opposition party, ahead of the 2027 polls.

Clearly he can’t obtain form from Wike-led camp.

Following the Supreme Court’s recent verdict, which voided the November 15-16, 2025 national convention in Ibadan that produced Turaki as national chairman, both camps have been laying claims to the party’s soul. The Wike-led camp assumed control immediately after the apex court judgment and is recognised by INEC.

However, the Board of Trustees, BoT, led by former Senate President, Adolphus Wabara, said the court’s verdict had made the PDP leaderless on grounds that Wike; former National Secretary, Senator Samuel Anyanwu; and National Legal Adviser, Kamaldeen Ajibade, and others, who set up the caretaker committee, had earlier been expelled before the Ibadan convention.

He consequently assumed control and the move led to the raising of an Interim National Executive Committee, led by Turaki.

The National Publicity Secretary of the Turaki camp, Ini Ememobong, told Vanguard yesterday that they had written INEC for recognition and are waiting for the electoral umpire’s response.

Jonathan didn’t buy our form, we’re not expecting him — Wike-backed PDP

Speaking to Vanguard in Abuja, Mohammed Haruna Jungudo, National Publicity Secretary of the PDP National Working Committee aligned with Wike, dismissed suggestions that Jonathan is politically close to his camp.

However, Ememobong maintained that the former president remains a member of the party and is free to decide his next political move.

Jungudo said: “Goodluck has not purchased our form yet and he has not been romancing with us, so we are not expecting him to come. Goodluck Jonathan, buy the presidential nomination form from where? You are not talking to Kabiru Turaki’s group. And you should know you are not talking to Kabiru Tanimu Turaki.”

We’ll welcome Jonathan — Ememobong

Responding separately, Ememobong declined to rule out the possibility of Jonathan entering the contest.

“Well, that is for him (Jonathan) to determine. It is not for us. The choice of buying nomination form, when to buy, and where to buy from, is entirely his.

“What we can say is that his name is on our register and which is what we can answer to,” Ememobong said.

The latest disagreement adds another layer to the PDP’s lingering post-convention crisis, with rival blocs still battling for legitimacy, structure and control as the opposition party struggles to steady itself ahead of 2027.

You’re biased, hands off suit against Jonathan, lawyer tells judge

During proceedings in the suit challenging Jonathan’s eligibility, a fresh motion was filed before the Federal High Court in Abuja seeking recusal of Justice Peter Lifu from the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2102/ 2025, which was lodged against ex-President Jonathan by an Abuja-based lawyer, Mr. Johnmary Jideobi.

The plaintiff further petitioned the Chief Judge of the court, Justice John Tsoho, demanding retrieval of the case file and its reassignment to another judge for objective determination of legal questions posed therein.

In a petition dated May 9 seen by Vanguard, yesterday, the plaintiff alleged that Justice Lifu, at the last adjournment, took decisions that revealed his bias against him.

According to him, his counsel, Ndubuisi Ukpai, had notified the court that all parties in the suit had been duly served with the originating processes and had also confirmed that the 1st defendant (Jonathan) had just served him with a counter-affidavit, written address, and notice of preliminary objection in opposition to the suit.

The plaintiff said his lawyer, thereafter, sought an adjournment to enable him respond to all the processes, pursuant to the provision of Order 13, Rule 50 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2019, which provides 14 days within which to fully prepare and file a reply

alleged that, without any application by any of the parties for an abridgment of time, the judge unilaterally gave his lawyer only three days, which included a weekend, to respond to the processes.

The petitioner told the CJ that, despite pleas from his lawyer that he had a case already fixed before another court, Justice Lifu declined to rescind his decision, citing INEC’s election time-table, which none of the parties had raised.

“I most respectfully submit that the actions of Hon. Justice Peter Lifu have created a situation where I no longer believe I can receive a fair hearing, based on the following premises.

“The learned judge, without any prompt/application from the parties, stripped me of my statutory 14-day window to file a reply to the 1st Defendant’s counter-affidavit and written address, which evinces a radical departure from regular procedure and suggests a predisposition against my constitutional rights.

“By ignoring Order 13, Rule 50, the judge has denied me the procedural regularity and ‘level playing field’ I am entitled as a litigant in a matter originated and initiated by myself.

“My counsel’s inability to meet the Monday, May 11, 2026, deadline due to prior court engagements was ignored without justification. This denies me the right to be properly represented and heard.

“The judge’s unilateral introduction of the INEC timetable, which was not part of the 1st Defendant’s arguments, I believe, suggest that the judge has stepped out of his role as a neutral arbiter and is acting as an advocate for a ‘speedy disposal’ that specifically prejudices my case.

“Section 36(6)(b) of the 1999 Constitution guarantees me adequate time and facilities to prepare my case. Forcing a response within 72 hours over a weekend, when no emergency was proven, is a grave violation of this right.

“In light of the foregoing, I humbly pray Your Lordship as follows: “The immediate transfer of Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/ 2102/2025 from the court of Hon. Justice Peter Lifu to any other judge of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

“A directive or memo to Hon. Justice Peter Lifu to, forthwith, suspend further proceedings, pending determination of this transfer request,” the petitioner added.

Meanwhile, when the case came up, yesterday, neither the plaintiff nor the defendant was in court for the scheduled hearing.

Similarly, INEC and Attorney-General of the Federation, AGF, who are the 2nd and 3rd defendants in the matter, were also not in court.

On his part, ex-President Jonathan, who was represented by a team of lawyers, led by Chief Chris Uche, SAN, prayed the court to strike out the case for lack of diligent prosecution.

Alternatively, Uche, SAN, noted that since he had already joined issues with the plaintiff, the case should be dismissed with a cost of N5million in favour of his client. In his ruling, Justice Lifu noted that there was no evidence that both INEC and the AGF were served with hearing notices.

He held that service of hearing notice is fundamental in such a case, adding that he was minded to grant one more adjournment to accommodate the plaintiff and the two other defendants.

Adjournment to May 15

Therefore, he adjourned the case till Friday and ordered that hearing notices be served on the plaintiff, INEC and the AGF.

The plaintiff had in his suit, posed a lone question for the court to determine:

“Whether in view of the combined provisions of the entirety of Sections 1(1), (2) & (3) and 137(3) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended and their conflated interpretation, the 1st Defendant is eligible, under any circumstances [whatsoever] to contest for the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria?”

Upon the determination of the question, he sought among other reliefs:

“An order of perpetual injunction of this Honourable Court restraining the first Defendant [Goodluck Ebele Jonathan] from presenting himself to any political party in Nigeria for nomination as its candidate for the general election into the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria holding in 2027 and other years to come.

“An order of perpetual injunction of this Honourable Court restraining the 2nd Defendant [INEC] from either accepting from any political party in Nigeria the name of the 1st Defendant [Goodluck Ebele Jonathan] or publishing same as a candidate for election into the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria holding in 2027 and other years to come.”

As well as, “an order of this Honourable Court directing the 3rd Defendant [Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation] to ensure compliance with the decisions and orders of this court.”

In an affidavit of facts deposed in support of the suit by one Emmanuel Agida, the plaintiff contended that if ex-President Jonathan wins the 2027 presidential election, which is for a term of 4 years spanning 2027 to 2031, he would have exceeded 8 years being the cumulative maximum years a Nigerian President is statutorily permitted to stay in office.

“That the Plaintiff believes that the 1st defendant, having completed the unexpired term of late President Yar’Adua and subsequently served a full term after the 2011 election, has exhausted the constitutional limit of two tenures as President.

“That if the court does not intervene timeously, a political party may present the 1st defendant as its presidential candidate in the 2027 general election, thereby breaching the constitution.

“In the event the 1st defendant is returned as elected and sworn as the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria come in 2027, it will mark the 3rd time the 1st defendant will be taking oath of office as the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

Former President Jonathan has since asked the court to dismiss the suit, which he described as frivolous and vexatious, insisting that the issues the plaintiff raised against him were already decided by different courts. (Vanguard)

Update news