Key Changes to Federal High Court Pre-Election Rules in 2026

On 13 July 2026, Justice John Terhemba Tsoho, Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, announced new rules for pre-election cases. The Federal High Court (Pre-Election) Practice Directions (Amendment), 2026, takes effect on 14 July 2026. This update modifies earlier pre-election rules made under Nigeria's Constitution and the Electoral Act, 2026. It comes just about six months before the general elections scheduled for 16 January 2027. The timing is intentional as it aims to address legal gaps that could delay election-related disputes.

Why Speed Matters in Pre-Election Cases

In Nigeria, pre-election matters like nominations and disqualifications must be settled before elections. The Constitution states that any pre-election suit must be filed within 14 days of the event in question. The courts have 180 days from the filing date to reach a decision. If someone appeals, that time frame gets even longer. Political parties need to submit their candidate lists at least 120 days before the elections. If a challenge to a candidate's qualification is filed too close to a primary, it can take longer than the election schedule allows. The 2026 Amendment aims to fix these timing issues since the legislature has not.

Changes Made by the Amendment

One of the key changes is that court registries will now be open on Saturdays, Sundays, and public holidays from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. This is specifically for filing pre-election matters. With the 14-day filing rule, keeping registries closed over weekends could deny someone their right to file a suit. This new rule makes it easier to access the courts.

Paragraph 7 maintains the use of originating summons for pre-election suits but adds a new requirement. If a party claims fraud or forgery, they must submit written statements that can be questioned in court. This change acknowledges that the old process does not fit well with cases involving serious allegations. Additionally, anyone challenging party primary results must include all relevant parties in their suit right from the start.

The rules for communicating with lawyers have also been updated. Paragraph 8 allows the court to send important updates through email or other electronic means with at least 48 hours' notice. Paragraph 10 gives judges the power to use technology for virtual hearings. Paragraph 9 allows the Chief Judge to assign judges across divisions and move cases around, ensuring a fair distribution of workload within the required 180-day timeframe.

Hearing Procedures Under the New Rules

The rules on hearings are stricter now. Paragraph 11 states that cases must be scheduled within seven days after pleadings close. Each party can only ask for two adjournments unless a lawyer changes. No adjournments can be requested on the day a hearing is set. Priority will be given to pre-election matters until a judgment is reached. Paragraph 11(3) reiterates that decisions on jurisdictional issues will only be made during the final judgment. Paragraph 12 introduces strict timelines for responses to applications, and costs can be imposed on parties that delay proceedings unnecessarily.

Previous Court Rulings Shaping the Amendment

The Amendment builds on earlier court decisions. The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that the 14-day filing period is strict. In Garba v Adua, the court dismissed a case as out of time once the filing period had passed. Similarly, in Fati Kakenna Alkali Monguno v All Progressives Congress, the Court of Appeal ruled that cases lacking proper filing dates would be dismissed. In later cases, the Supreme Court rejected attempts to extend the 14-day period, confirming the strictness of the deadline. The new weekend access rule is clearly a response to these rulings.

Understanding the Amendment’s Limitations

It is important to note that the 2026 Amendment is a Practice Direction, not a law. The Supreme Court clarified this in University of Lagos v Aigoro, stating that such directions do not have the same authority as laws. The Amendment only supplements existing rules and cannot contradict them. For example, the requirement for written statements in fraud cases is an addition to what is already in the rules. This means it must fit within the existing framework.

Costs and Their Impact

The costs rule in Paragraph 12(5) is not just symbolic. The Supreme Court has shown it will impose significant costs for frivolous applications. In a recent case, the court ordered lawyers to pay ₦30 million for wasting the court's time. This ruling indicates a willingness to use costs as a serious deterrent against delaying tactics. The Federal High Court now has a specific framework to impose such costs in pre-election matters.

Managing Case Assignments

Paragraph 9 gives the Chief Judge the authority to move pre-election cases between divisions. This is not a new concept, as the Federal High Court Act allows for transfers when cases are filed in the wrong court. However, this new rule allows for internal transfers for better management of cases. It can help ensure that cases are heard within the 180-day limit. But if not done carefully, it could raise concerns about fair hearing rights.

Learning from Past Amendments

The 2026 Amendment builds on previous pre-election rules, enhancing the process established in earlier years. The new rules for weekend filings and the requirement for written statements are responses to issues seen in past elections. They aim to address filing delays, disputes over party primaries, and other challenges that have arisen in previous election cycles.

Joining Necessary Parties

One significant change is that parties challenging primary results must join all necessary parties at the time of filing. This responds to a common problem where important parties were left out, leading to unfair outcomes. The Supreme Court has ruled that all relevant parties must be part of the proceedings for a fair judgment.

Ongoing Legal Battles

The interaction between the new rules and existing laws is still evolving. For instance, in July 2026, the Court of Appeal struck down certain sections of the Electoral Act, which could affect pre-election cases under the new rules. These legal challenges highlight the complexities that could impact how the new rules are applied in practice.

Recommendations for Legal Practitioners

As the 2027 elections approach, lawyers should adopt new practices based on the 2026 Amendment. They should file within the 14-day limit, ensure all necessary parties are joined at the start, prepare for depositions in cases of fraud, and be cautious with adjournment requests. Understanding how these changes affect their cases will be critical for success.

Conclusion

The Federal High Court (Pre-Election) Practice Directions (Amendment), 2026, is a significant update. It does not change the law but removes obstacles that could delay justice. As elections near, these changes will be crucial in determining whether pre-election disputes are resolved before citizens cast their votes.