The Federal High Court has introduced a new set of practice directions aimed at ensuring the speedy hearing and determination of disputes arising from party primaries ahead of the 2027 general elections.
The new rules, titled Federal High Court (Pre-Election) Practice Directions, 2026, were signed by the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice John Tsoho, on June 26, 2026.
The Practice Directions establish a special framework for the filing, management and determination of pre-election matters brought under the Constitution, the Electoral Act, 2026 and the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2019.
Justice Tsoho said the objectives of the new rules are to “provide for a fair, impartial and expeditious determination of pre-election cases; ensure that in all election matters, the parties focus on matters which are genuinely in issue; minimize the time spent in dealing with interlocutory matters; ensure that the possibility of amicable settlement is explored before the parties go into hearing; and minimize undue adjournments and delays in the conduct of matters.”
Under the Practice Directions, the court will pay particular attention to the provisions of Sections 29(5), (6) and (7), 83(5) and (6), and 88(1) to (4) of the Electoral Act, 2026, as well as Section 285(14)(c) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), which govern pre-election disputes.
Recognising the time-sensitive nature of election-related litigation, the court directed that it would sit on Saturdays, Sundays and public holidays between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m. to hear pre-election matters where necessary.
The rules also provide that all pre-election suits shall be commenced by originating summons in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, subject to necessary modifications dictated by the circumstances of each case.
In cases involving allegations of fraud, forgery or other highly contentious facts, parties will be required to provide detailed particulars of the claims. Such allegations may be determined through oral testimony by witnesses, alongside documentary evidence, rather than relying solely on affidavit evidence.
The Practice Directions further empower the court to summon any person to testify, produce documents or be cross-examined during proceedings. They also permit the use of electronic mail for urgent communication with counsel and allow virtual hearings where appropriate.
To accelerate the resolution of disputes, the court directed that cases should be fixed for hearing within seven days after parties conclude the exchange of court processes. It also stated that pre-election matters would enjoy priority over other cases until judgment is delivered.
The new rules also empower the court, where appropriate, to deem a party’s written address as adopted upon an oral application where the opposing parties are absent.
To discourage delays, the Practice Directions limit adjournments, providing that not more than two adjournments shall be granted to any party throughout the lifespan of a pre-election case.
The Practice Directions state:
“Provided that no application for adjournment shall be entertained on a day fixed for hearing.
“Where a party seeks to change his Counsel during the lifespan of a case, not more than two (2) adjournments shall be granted to him to so do.
“Where it is expedient, and in furtherance of the objectives of this Practice Directions, the Court may schedule the time and date of hearing on such day and at such time as may be convenient for the parties.
“Counsel shall ensure that they are present in Court and ready to proceed with their case at all times.
“(8) Where the provisions of Sub-Paragraphs (6) and (7) of this Practice Directions become impracticable to apply by reason of ill health or any other unavoidable incidence, such counsel shall ensure that a counsel of requisite knowledge of the issues before the court is present in Court and ready to proceed with the case in his or her stead or apply that the case be heard virtually where practicable; with the consent of parties.”
The introduction of the Practice Directions comes ahead of political parties’ preparations for the 2027 general elections, when a surge in litigation over the conduct of party primaries and the nomination of candidates is expected. Pre-election matters are constitutionally time-bound, making prompt adjudication essential to preventing prolonged legal disputes from disrupting the electoral process.
Legal practitioners say the new framework is expected to improve case management, reduce procedural delays and ensure that pre-election disputes are concluded within the constitutional timelines.