New Guidelines Introduced by Federal High Court for Pre-Election Disputes
The Federal High Court has rolled out a comprehensive set of practice guidelines designed to streamline the resolution of disputes stemming from party primaries in advance of the 2027 general election. These new regulations, known as the ‘Federal High Court (Pre-Election) Practice Direction 2026’, were officially signed into effect by Chief Judge Mr. Justice John Tsoho on June 26, 2026.
These practice directions lay out a structured approach for the filing, management, and resolution of pre-election matters, in accordance with the Constitution, the Elections Act 2026, and the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019. The framework aims to ensure that cases are addressed fairly and swiftly.
Justice Tsoho emphasized that the intent behind the new rules is to facilitate impartial adjudication of pre-election cases. Specifically, the guidelines encourage parties to concentrate on the core issues at stake, minimize prolonged debates on procedural matters, promote amicable resolutions prior to trial, and significantly reduce postponements that could hinder the timely progress of cases.
Under these new directives, the Court will closely adhere to specific sections of the Elections Act 2026, including 29(5), (6), (7), and 83(5), (6), along with section 285(14)(c) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), which govern pre-election disputes. Recognizing the urgent nature of these cases, the court has designated Saturday, Sunday, and public holiday mornings from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. as official hearing times for pre-election matters.
The updated rules stipulate that all pre-election proceedings must commence with a summons, following the applicable provisions of the Federal High Court’s Civil Procedure Rules, while allowing necessary adjustments based on individual case circumstances. In instances where allegations involve fraud or forgery, parties are required to provide comprehensive details about the claims, with room for both oral testimony and documentary evidence to substantiate their cases.
Moreover, the guidelines grant the court the authority to subpoena individuals for testimony and document production during proceedings. They also enable emergency communications via email with attorneys and allow for virtual hearings, ensuring flexibility in the judicial process.
To expedite resolutions, the court has mandated that cases are to be prepared for trial within seven days after the exchange of court proceedings, prioritizing pre-election issues over other lawsuits until a determination is reached. The rules further permit the court to accept a party’s written submissions as having been orally presented if the opposing party is absent. To minimize delays, the Practice Direction restricts each party to only two adjournments for the entirety of the pre-election litigation.
Furthermore, the guidelines clarify that no requests for adjournments will be considered on scheduled hearing dates. If a party wishes to change representation during an ongoing case, they are limited to two adjournments for that purpose. The provisions also state that lawyers must be prepared to proceed with the case at any time, and if circumstances arise that prevent their appearance, an alternate lawyer must be present or virtual hearings will be considered with the consent of parties involved.
The introduction of these practice guidelines is timely, coinciding with political parties’ strategies for the upcoming 2027 general election. With constitutional timeframes for addressing pre-election issues, an efficient resolution is crucial to prevent lengthy legal battles from interfering with the electoral process. Legal experts believe that this proactive framework will enhance case management, minimize procedural delays, and ensure that pre-election disputes are resolved within necessary constitutional deadlines.
