A petitioner in the Federal Capital Territory Area Council election dispute, Dr. Paul Moses Ogidi, has called for the immediate suspension of the anticipated judgment in Petition No. FCT/ACET/EP/01/2026, citing what he described as a fundamental jurisdictional defect in the composition of the Area Council Election Petition Tribunal.
In a press statement issued on Tuesday and personally signed by Dr Ogidi, the Petitioner said information available to him indicated that the tribunal was preparing to deliver judgment in his petition against the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and two other respondents. He, however, argued that the tribunal’s composition allegedly contravenes the provisions of Section 135(3) of the Electoral Act, 2026.
According to him, the law mandates the inclusion of a High Court Judge in the constitution of the Area Council Election Petition Tribunal, a requirement he claimed has not been met.
Dr. Ogidi maintained that the issue was not a mere procedural technicality but one that directly affects the competence and legitimacy of the tribunal to hear and determine the matter.
He disclosed that upon discovering the alleged defect, his legal team petitioned the Chief Judge of the Federal Capital Territory on April 10, 2026, requesting the immediate reconstitution of the tribunal in accordance with the Electoral Act.
“Despite the seriousness of the concerns raised, no response was received and no corrective action was taken,” he stated.
The petitioner further revealed that a separate petition was submitted to the Chief Justice of Nigeria on May 21, 2026, seeking urgent intervention over what he described as constitutional and statutory irregularities in the tribunal’s composition.
According to him, the concerns raised in both petitions remain unresolved.
Dr. Ogidi also said that communications on the matter had been forwarded to several national and international bodies, including the United Nations, the European Union, the Embassy of the United States of America, the British High Commission and other stakeholders involved in promoting democratic governance, electoral integrity and the rule of law.
He argued that jurisdiction remains the foundation of every judicial proceeding and warned that any judgment delivered by a tribunal whose jurisdiction is under challenge could later be declared a nullity.
“The decision to proceed with judgment while petitions challenging the Tribunal’s composition remain pending before the relevant judicial authorities would raise profound legal and constitutional concerns,” he said.
He added that such a move could create the impression that statutory compliance and due process had been sacrificed for expediency.
The petitioner consequently demanded the immediate suspension of the proposed judgment, urgent intervention by the Chief Justice of Nigeria and other judicial authorities to determine the pending petitions, and the reconstitution of the tribunal in strict compliance with the Electoral Act.
He also called for measures to protect the integrity of the electoral justice system by ensuring that all jurisdictional and constitutional issues are fully resolved before any final decision is delivered.
Dr. Ogidi stressed that the matter transcends the interests of a single candidate or election petition, describing it as a test of public confidence in the judiciary and Nigeria’s democratic institutions.
He warned that proceeding with judgment without first addressing the concerns raised could undermine the credibility of the electoral adjudication process and set what he termed a dangerous precedent in the administration of electoral justice.
The Area Council Election Petition Tribunal and the relevant judicial authorities had not publicly responded to the allegations at the time of filing this report.