The Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, yesterday read the riot act to judicial officers, politicians, lawyers and other stakeholders, warning against turning the courts into political battlegrounds through intimidation, misinformation, conflicting orders and abuse of judicial processes.
The CJN declared that election petitions must be decided strictly on the strength of evidence and applicable laws, rather than political pressure, public sentiment or the popularity of candidates, insisting that the judiciary would not tolerate attempts to undermine its independence or manipulate judicial proceedings.
Her warning came as 375 judicial officers were sworn in to serve on election petition tribunals across the country, while the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, called for a special code of conduct for lawyers handling electoral disputes to curb professional misconduct.
At the same event, Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Joash Amupitan, raised the alarm over the growing threat of deepfake videos, artificial intelligence-generated disinformation and manipulated electronic evidence, warning that the technologies could complicate election petitions and threaten political stability. The officials spoke at the swearing-in ceremony and opening of a three-day capacity-building workshop for Justices of the Court of Appeal and election petition tribunal members, themed “Election Tribunal as a Tool for Political Stability,” at the Body of Benchers Complex, Abuja.
Addressing the newly inaugurated judicial officers, Kekere-Ekun warned politicians, political parties, public officials and social media users against attempts to influence judicial decisions through public statements, intimidation, deliberate misinformation and campaigns designed to undermine the credibility of the courts.
“The judicial process is not a continuation of the electoral campaign by other means,” she declared, stressing that the volume of public opinion or the popularity of a candidate could not substitute for credible evidence before a court of law.
The CJN maintained that election petitions must be determined on the basis of pleadings, evidence and the relevant provisions of the Constitution and electoral laws, warning influential persons against prejudging cases or making inflammatory statements capable of heightening political tension.
“Misinformation, intimidation and attempts to prejudice pending proceedings have no place in a society governed by the rule of law,” she said. Kekere-Ekun also expressed concern over the increasing use of social media to attack judicial officers and influence public perception of pending cases, urging media organisations to exercise restraint and professionalism in reporting judicial proceedings.
She condemned the filing of multiple suits and appeals on the same subject matter, the procurement of conflicting orders from courts of coordinate jurisdiction and the use of ex parte applications to secure tactical advantages in political disputes.
According to her, such practices “can bring the administration of justice into disrepute,” and legal practitioners must resist the temptation to turn the judicial process into “another instrument of political contest.”
The CJN reminded the tribunal members that their duty was not to determine the political preferences of Nigerians but to resolve disputes arising from elections in accordance with the law, irrespective of the personalities or political interests involved.
She urged them to remain “firm where firmness is required, patient where patience is necessary, and impartial in every circumstance,” stressing that public confidence in the judiciary would depend largely on their conduct and the integrity of their decisions.
In his remarks, Amupitan warned that the 2027 elections could expose tribunals to sophisticated forms of digital manipulation capable of distorting evidence, misleading voters and creating confusion over election results.
He said threats to electoral integrity had moved beyond ballot snatching and physical intimidation to the use of artificial intelligence to impersonate election officials, circulate fabricated announcements and manufacture false evidence of electoral malpractice.
The INEC chairman identified three major threats, including AI-generated messages falsely announcing the relocation or cancellation of polling units, deepfake audio and video recordings circulated during the statutory broadcast blackout before voting, and cloned videos of Returning Officers falsely declaring election results before collation had been concluded.
He warned that fabricated recordings could subsequently be presented before election tribunals as evidence of malpractice, while genuine recordings could be dismissed as artificial intelligence-generated materials.
Amupitan described the latter phenomenon as the “Liar’s Dividend,” saying it could make the authentication of electronic evidence increasingly difficult and undermine confidence in judicial decisions.
He urged tribunal members to apply rigorous evidential standards under Section 84 of the Evidence Act, including verification of digital provenance, proper forensic chains of custody and reliance on certified electoral records obtained from INEC.
The commission’s chairman cautioned that evidence generated through the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS), the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV), result sheets and voters’ registers must be subjected to careful examination to establish authenticity and reliability.
Such evidence, he said, “should neither be treated as infallible nor discounted simply because the evidence is electronic.”
Amupitan also drew attention to Section 60(3) of the Electoral Act 2026, which addresses electronic transmission of polling-unit results and the legal implications of communication failures, warning that its interpretation “may feature prominently in future petitions.”
He explained that INEC’s Regulations and Guidelines for the Conduct of Elections, 2026, prescribed the use of BVAS, procedures for uploading results to IReV and safeguards for reconciling electronic records with physical result sheets during collation.
According to him, the guidelines also established mechanisms for addressing technological failures and discrepancies, providing “clearer operational standards against which allegations of non-compliance may be evaluated.”
With the presidential and National Assembly elections scheduled for January 16, 2027, and governorship and state Houses of Assembly elections fixed for February 6, Amupitan said the legitimacy of Nigeria’s democracy would depend on “impartial electoral administration and fearless judicial adjudication.”
He described election petition tribunals as “the constitutional valve that releases political pressure and prevents electoral friction from devolving into civil disruption,” warning that inconsistent, excessively technical or delayed judgments could undermine public confidence.
The INEC chairman urged judicial officers to maintain consistency in their interpretation of electoral laws, particularly on substantial compliance, burden and standard of proof, and candidate nomination disputes.
While acknowledging the need to determine election petitions within constitutional timelines, he cautioned that expedition “must never displace the fundamental right to fair hearing,” urging judges to “avoid technicalities that defeat substantive justice.”
He also advocated closer professional engagement between INEC and the judiciary to improve understanding of electoral procedures and technological innovations, but stressed that such cooperation must not compromise judicial independence.
According to him, the proposed engagement “is not an avenue to influence judicial decisions or discuss the merits of pending proceedings.”
Amupitan reminded tribunal members that they carried “the democratic aspirations of over 200 million Nigerians,” describing the courtroom as “the altar upon which public confidence in constitutional governance is preserved.”
Fagbemi, who also addressed the gathering, urged the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) to develop a specific code of conduct for lawyers handling election petitions and pre-election matters to curb unethical practices and abuse of court processes.
He said courts must remain institutions for the “fair and dispassionate resolution” of disputes rather than “arenas for professional misconduct or unnecessary controversy.”
The Attorney-General also drew attention to changes introduced by the Electoral Act 2026, which he said had altered the legal framework governing election petitions, party primaries, campaign financing and electoral administration.
He cited Section 138(1), which confines election petitions to allegations of corrupt practices, non-compliance with the Electoral Act and failure to secure a majority of lawful votes cast, while removing candidate disqualification as an express ground for challenging an election after the polls.
Fagbemi explained that disputes over candidates’ qualifications would consequently have to be addressed largely through pre-election proceedings.
He also cited Sections 83(5) and 83(6), which restrict judicial intervention in certain internal political party disputes and provide for costs of not less than N10 million each against litigants and their counsel in specified circumstances.
According to him, the law had abolished indirect primaries, leaving direct primaries and consensus arrangements as recognised methods of selecting candidates, while raising campaign expenditure ceilings to N10 billion for presidential candidates and N3 billion for governorship candidates.
He added that the maximum individual donation to a candidate had increased from N50 million to N500 million, while political parties were required to maintain digital membership registers and submit them to INEC at least 21 days before primaries, congresses or conventions.
The Attorney-General warned that erroneous judicial decisions could have far-reaching consequences for governance and democratic stability, observing that a wrong decision “may take another four years to correct.”
He suggested the establishment of multiple tribunal panels in jurisdictions likely to record heavy volumes of election petitions and urged careful selection of court registrars to ensure efficient proceedings.
Earlier, the President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Monica Dongban-Mensem, disclosed that of the 375 judicial officers nominated for election petition tribunals, 138 had previously served on tribunals, while 237 were newly nominated.
She said the nominations followed consultations with Heads of Courts and the NBA, reminding the officers that their appointment was “a call to service, not privilege.”
Dongban-Mensem warned them to resist “every attempt at improper influence, whether through political pressure, inducement, intimidation, personal relationships or other considerations extraneous to the administration of justice.”
She also cautioned against unnecessary adjournments and procedural delays, stressing that tribunal members must balance speedy determination of petitions with fairness to litigants.
“Expedition must never undermine fairness, just as procedural indulgence must not frustrate timely adjudication,” she said.
The Court of Appeal President disclosed that a centralised Case Management System had been developed for scanning, uploading and storing judicial decisions, while an Electronic Filing Portal had been introduced to facilitate the filing and service of court processes.
She said the systems would improve efficiency, maintain auditable records and enable the monitoring of election petition proceedings across the 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory.
A major highlight of the ceremony was the unveiling of the second edition of the Judicial Electoral Manual 2026 by the CJN.
The manual brings together relevant constitutional provisions, sections of the Electoral Act, practice directions and decided cases to guide judicial officers in adjudicating electoral disputes.
Kekere-Ekun, however, cautioned that the publication was not a substitute for independent judicial reasoning, while Amupitan described it as “an indispensable compass” for consistent adjudication.
Fagbemi welcomed the publication, saying it would improve the quality of judicial decisions and promote consistency in the interpretation of electoral laws.