Femi Falana: Judiciary Must Not Pick 2027 Election Winners

Human rights advocate, Femi Falana, has strongly asserted that the judiciary should not be the ultimate decider of election winners in Nigeria. The veteran lawyer believes that the involvement of the courts in the nation's democratic process needs to be curtailed, as it currently undermines the choices made by citizens.

Speaking on Arise Television's Sunrise Daily, the activist lawyer conveyed his skepticism regarding the judiciary's capacity to effectively address the challenges anticipated in the 2027 general elections. Falana remarked, "There is no indication yet that the Nigerian judiciary is positioned to address some of the challenges that may emanate with respect to some of the elections likely to take place in January and February next year." He further emphasized this critical point, adding, "For me, the first matter to address is the role of the judiciary in the electoral process in Nigeria. We must stop the practice whereby the court determine the winners of the election in Nigeria."

Falana went on to stress the crucial need for the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and all relevant stakeholders to ensure the conduct of credible elections, free from any form of irregularities. He highlighted the recent Osun State election as an example, stating, "forget all the shortcomings, at the end of the day, the beauty of it will be that the governorship election will not go to court because the people have decided, they have elected their leader so no court should be allowed to hide under technicalities to make a mockery of the popular choice of the people."

He reiterated that the judiciary's involvement in the country's democratic process "must have to be extremely limited." According to Falana, this limitation is contingent on the media, INEC, and all concerned Nigerians working to ensure that elections are conducted properly and that no fake results are announced. This, he argued, would significantly reduce the scope for disputes that might lead parties to tribunals, regular courts, or appellate courts. He concluded by affirming that the process must begin with the conduct of genuinely good elections, thereby naturally restricting the courts' role in democratic outcomes.