By Okoi Obono-Obla
Analysis:
The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) is a professional association of lawyers and not a court of law vested with the power to interpret statutes. Consequently, the NBA’s statement on Section 83 of the Electoral Act 2026, asserting that courts in Nigeria lack jurisdiction to entertain cases involving the internal affairs of political parties, is not correct. The NBA relied solely on subsection (5) of Section 83 without construing the section holistically, communally, and broadly to infer the legislature’s true intention.
A proper interpretation requires reading subsection (5) in conjunction with subsection (3). Subsection (3) preserves limited grounds for judicial oversight, particularly where political parties fail to comply with the Constitution, the Electoral Act, or their own constitutions and guidelines. Thus, the ouster of jurisdiction in subsection (5) is conditional, not absolute.
Judicial Role:
Given that some matters presently before Nigerian courts concern internal affairs of political parties, the NBA ought to have refrained from taking a definitive position and instead awaited judicial pronouncements. Courts, not professional associations, are constitutionally empowered to interpret statutes and determine their scope.
Temporal Application of the Law
The Electoral Act 2026 came into force in February 2026. Therefore, cases filed when the Electoral Act 2022 was in force cannot be adjudicated under the 2026 Act. It is well settled that the applicable law is the one in force when the cause of action arose. In other words, the 2026 Act applies prospectively and not retrospectively.
Conclusion:
The NBA’s interpretation of Section 83 of the Electoral Act 2026 is flawed. Courts are not completely barred from entertaining intra‑party disputes; jurisdiction remains where constitutional or statutory compliance is implicated. Furthermore, the 2026 Act applies only prospectively, and pending cases filed under the 2022 Act must be determined under that regime.
Leave a comment