Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Dr. Monday Ubani, has stated that former President Goodluck Jonathan remains legally qualified to contest the 2027 presidential election under the provisions of the 1999 constitution.

Speaking during an interview on ARISE News on Tuesday, Ubani spoke on the legality of Jonathan’s potential candidacy, citing his position was based strictly on constitutional interpretation and judicial pronouncements and not on political preferences.

“I want to say this, that my personal opinion, the legal interpretation of the eligibility of the former president clearly is not a validation. Whatever opinion that I express is not a validation of whether I want him to run for the presidency of Nigeria 2027.”

Ubani explained that previous court rulings had affirmed Jonathan’s eligibility, stressing that the constitution does not restrict him from contesting.

“Now, I’m only looking at it from the legal perspective. You are very correct that as far back as 2022, even after the fourth alteration of the constitution, there has been a judicial pronouncement that affirmed the fact that President Jonathan is clearly eligible to run.”

He recalled Jonathan’s emergence as president following the death of former President Musa Yar’Adua in 2010, clarifying that his initial assumption of office was not through an election but by constitutional operation.

“We recall that in 2010 he came in to complete the tenure of the late Musa Yar’Adua’s presidency, and he was naturally sworn in. But it is not by election. It’s clearly, clearly by disposition of the law, complying with Section 146 of the 1999 constitution. It’s by operation of law.”

Ubani further noted that Jonathan’s first elected term began in 2011 and that court judgments had consistently upheld his right to seek re-election.

“It was in 2011 that he ran for a proper election in which he won 2011 to 2015, and he was sworn in. I think even in 2015, when he wanted to recontest, somebody went to court.”

YouTube player

“And one Justice Oniyangi, one Mudashiru, ruled that the president then is eligible to run, and that there’s nothing that is going to stop him from running. That the former oath that he took in 2010 was not by virtue of election, but by virtue of succession that he succeeded the former president. And so, there is nothing that actually should preclude him from running.”

Addressing the 2017 constitutional amendment which came into effect in 2018, Ubani stressed that the law cannot be applied retroactively to disqualify Jonathan.

“But there was an alteration of the constitution, what we call the fourth alteration in 2017, that came into operation in 2018. Now, by virtue of decided authorities by the Supreme Court, law anywhere in the world is prospective, it’s not retrospective. You don’t enact a law and begin to take a vested right, or existing right, or impose new obligations when the person at the time that situation took place wasn’t aware of the existence of a law.”

“So every law is prospective, every law. The commencement date of any law is from the day it is signed into law. It becomes operational.”

He maintained that unless expressly stated, no law can retroactively bar Jonathan from contesting the 2027 election.

“So if the law does not especially include the provision that it is retrospective or retroactive, you cannot in any way interpret the law to be retroactive. So if there was an amendment in 2017 that came into operation in 2018, how could that law be applicable to vested rights that took place in 2010 to 2015? It is clearly, clearly, you know, impossible for such a situation to occur. So my view is that President Jonathan is clearly eligible under the 1999 constitution to run for 2027.”

Ubani added that his interpretation is strictly legal and does not indicate political support for Jonathan’s candidacy.

“As I said earlier, I’m not in any way validating his choice as a president. I’m only stating what the law has said. And the law itself is that he is eligible under the 1999 constitution, despite the provision of Section 137(3) that came into existence in 2018.”

Addressing fears about judicial bias in politically sensitive cases, Ubani dismissed concerns over potential manipulation of the courts.

“Our judiciary still respects what you call judicial precedent. There are precedents, you know, I mean, there are so many authorities by the Supreme Court that actually have laid this issue to rest — that issue of retrospective application of statutes is no, no. That is a presumption for perspective.”

He cited past cases where the Supreme Court rejected attempts to apply laws retroactively.

“I mean, if you look at the case of Nwobodo versus Onoh, there was an amendment of the electoral act. They wanted to give what you call a retrospective interpretation to that law. The Supreme Court said no.”

“There is also a case of Afolabi versus a governor for Oyo State. The same thing happened. Because except there is an express provision in the law that says that this particular statute should be retroactive or retrospective, there is no way you can, you know, enact a law and then begin to take away existing rights or begin to impose obligations.”

Ubani insisted that the judiciary cannot ignore settled precedents for political reasons.

“So I am here telling you with every amount of confidence that our judiciary has not degenerated to the level that they will now see such a judicial precedent in the body Supreme Court itself and then probably begin to take a different decision for political reasons. I doubt it and I’m giving you evidence of the truth, my brother.”

He concluded by emphasizing that multiple judicial pronouncements have confirmed Jonathan’s eligibility and that there is no constitutional gap affecting his chances in 2027.

“In 2022, even after the amendment, the federal high court in Bayelsa has also affirmed the fact that there is no provision in the constitution that disqualifies President Jonathan. And so if there is this court pronouncement that has not been appealed against, has not been nullified by any appellate and so on, what basis am I going to now probably engage in speculation? There is no gap. I don’t see any gap.” (AriseNews TV)