A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE PREVAILING JUDICIAL POSITION ON THE DETERMINATION OF PRE-ELECTION MATTERS IN NIGERIA

Internal party democracy still remains a source of concern in \"Nigeria as political party primary elections are often marred by acrimonies due to manipulation of results, allegation of exclusion of aspirants as well as substitution or changing the lists of delegates. This paper therefore analyzed the role court on the determination of such pre-election matters in Nigeria. Doctrinal method was adopted for this research, and accordingly, legal and judicial instruments on the primary elections were analyzed. The paper specifically finds among others that the limited jurisdiction granted to the Courts by Section 87 (9) of the Electoral Act in the determination of pre- election matters cannot really enhance and consolidate intra- party democracy in Nigeria. Secondly, the Supreme Court as a policy court rarely invokes its inherent jurisdiction to intervene in a pre-election matter of urgent importance where there is no legal provision governing such subject matter. Consequently, often time, damage would have been done to the internal cohesion of political parties before the law is amended to address the problem. The paper therefore recommends that Section 87 (9) of the Electoral Act should be amended to extend the jurisdiction of Courts to pre-nomination disputes such as those arising from disqualification of aspirants that have been screened, cleared and picked nomination forms to contest. Furthermore, the Supreme Court as policies court needs to use its inherent jurisdiction to intervene in pre- ‘nomination disputes since there is no law readily available in this -respect. This will enhance internal democracy within political parties. It will also afford the Supreme Court the opportunity to set precedent for the lower courts to use their intellectual capacity and authority to prevent abuse of franchise by political party leaders.