![Justice John Tsoho [Photo Credit: Federal High Court]](https://i0.wp.com/media.premiumtimesng.com/wp-content/files/2021/05/Federal-High-Court.jpg?fit=852%2C733&ssl=1)
The Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, John Tsoho, has issued new guidelines for the hearing of pre-election cases, introducing stricter timelines for filing and hearing suits while directing court registries nationwide to remain open on weekends and public holidays to receive pre-election filings.
The Federal High Court (Pre-Election) Practice Directions, seen by PREMIUM TIMES on Wednesday, show that the new rules, signed by Mr Tsoho on 26 June, took effect on 29 June.
|
|
Mr Tsoho repealed the Federal High Court (Pre-Election) Practice Directions, 2022. He issued the new guidelines pursuant to Sections 254 and 285 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), as well as Sections 29(5) and 88(2) of the Electoral Act, 2026.
A major feature of the new guidelines is the directive that registries in all Federal High Court judicial divisions across the country must remain open on Saturdays, Sundays and public holidays between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m. exclusively for the filing of pre-election matters.
|
|
|
|---|
“In cognisance of Pre-Election cases being time-sensitive in nature, the Registry of this Honourable Court in all the Judicial Divisions in the Federation shall be open on Saturdays, Sundays and Public Holidays, between the hours of 10 AM and 2 PM exclusively for the filing of Pre-Election matters,” the Practice Directions stated.
The directive underscores the court’s effort to ensure that constitutional timelines for determining pre-election disputes are not undermined by delays in filing court processes.
Originating summons mandatory
The new Practice Directions also make it mandatory for all pre-election cases to be commenced by originating summons, a kind of suit that relies on affidavit evidence instead of calling witnesses to testiify in open court.
Originating summonses are usually deployed in a case where the facts are largely undisputed and the court only needs to rule on compliance with rules and laws or otherwise.
“Every pre-election matter shall be commenced by an Originating Summons,” Mr Tsoho stressed.
However, the practice directions say where a case involves allegations of fraud, forgery or other highly contentious facts, parties are required to set out detailed particulars of those allegations. In such cases, the court may hear oral evidence from witnesses or receive documentary evidence to resolve disputed issues.
Applicants are required to file, alongside the originating summons, an affidavit setting out the facts relied upon, copies of all exhibits, a written address and an affidavit confirming that no similar action has been filed on the same subject matter.
Respondents must enter an appearance within seven days of being served and file their counter-affidavit and written address within 10 days. Where necessary, an applicant may file a reply within three days after receiving the respondent’s processes.
To encourage concise advocacy, the Practice Directions stipulate that written addresses must be typed in double spacing, use a 12-point font and not exceed 15 pages.
Parties, hearings
The guidelines also direct courts to pay particular attention to relevant provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026, and the Constitution in determining pre-election disputes.
They further require anyone challenging the conduct or outcome of a party primary to join all necessary parties to the suit.
“A party challenging the conduct or outcome of a Primary Election shall join as Respondents in the Suit, all the relevant parties to enable the court to effectively determine the dispute,” the Practice Directions stated.
The Chief Judge also retained the power to assign judges to hear pre-election matters in any judicial division or transfer cases from one division to another where necessary.
Under the new framework, courts are required to fix hearing dates within seven days after parties have completed the exchange of processes and to give priority to pre-election matters until judgment is delivered.
Virtual proceedings, limited adjournments
The practice directions encourage greater use of technology in managing pre-election cases.
Judges may conduct proceedings virtually where appropriate, while courts may notify lawyers of urgent hearings through email and other electronic means, provided such notice is issued at least 48 hours before the scheduled proceedings.
To facilitate electronic communication, parties and their lawyers are required to provide functional telephone numbers and email addresses to court registrars.
The new rules also seek to curb delays by restricting adjournments. No party is entitled to more than two adjournments, while requests for adjournment will not be entertained on days fixed for hearing.
Where a party changes legal representation during proceedings, no more than two adjournments may be granted on that ground.
In addition, where a lawyer is unable to attend court because of illness or other unavoidable circumstances, another lawyer familiar with the case is expected to appear, or an application may be made for the matter to proceed virtually, where practicable and with the consent of the parties.
The practice directions further reaffirm the constitutional requirement that preliminary objections and other interlocutory applications relating to the court’s jurisdiction will generally be determined alongside the substantive suit, except where the objection concerns service of originating processes.
They also provide that proceedings instituted before the commencement of the new Practice Directions will continue unaffected, although courts may issue appropriate directions where necessary to ensure compliance with the new procedural framework.
READ ALSO: 2023: Federal High Court issues practice directions on pre-election cases
Background
It has become customary for the Federal High Court, with divisions across the country and which sits on most of the pre-election disputes from different states, to issue new practice directions on the handling of pre-election cases in every election cycle.
Ahead of the 2023 general elections, Mr Tsoho released the Federal High Court (Pre-Election) Practice Directions, 2022, which introduced accelerated procedures for cases arising from party primaries and candidate nominations. Among other measures, the 2022 guidelines required pre-election suits to be commenced by originating summons, encouraged electronic communication and prescribed strict timelines for filing processes and hearing cases.
The 2026 Practice Directions replace the 2022 rules and align the court’s procedures with the Electoral Act, 2026, enacted ahead of the 2027 general elections.
The Electoral Act introduced some changes, including mandatory digital membership registers for political parties, the abolition of indirect primaries in favour of direct primaries or consensus, statutory recognition of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) and revised campaign spending limits for candidates.
Some of the Act’s provisions, particularly those relating to judicial intervention in the internal affairs of political parties, have, however, sparked debate among legal practitioners, with some arguing that their constitutionality may ultimately be tested in court.
![Afam Osigwe [PHOTO CREDIT: Afam Osigwe ]](https://i0.wp.com/media.premiumtimesng.com/wp-content/files/2024/07/424581560_895617985897058_5751002825058008354_n-e1721634000990.jpg?fit=1280%2C802&ssl=1)
