Okorocha vs Uzodimma: Court judgment raises jurisdiction question – Ahiakwo

Constitutional lawyer and public affairs analyst, Justice Osai Ahiakwo, has questioned the legal basis of the Federal High Court judgment recognising former Imo State governor, Rochas Okorocha as the All Progressives Congress, APC, candidate for Imo West Senatorial District in the 2027 elections.

Ahiakwo said the ruling raised questions about compliance with the constitutional 14-day limit for instituting pre-election cases, stressing that the court’s jurisdiction must be established before the merits of the dispute can be considered.

The court, presided over by Justice Obiora Egwuatu, ordered Governor Hope Uzodimma to stop presenting himself as the APC candidate for the district and directed the party to recognise Okorocha.

In a legal analysis of the judgment, Ahiakwo cited Section 285(9) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, which requires pre-election matters to be instituted within 14 days of the event, decision or action being challenged.

He noted that the APC reportedly conducted its Imo West senatorial primary on May 18, 2026, while Okorocha instituted his suit on August 13, raising questions about whether the action was filed within the constitutionally prescribed period.

However, he said the decisive issue was the specific decision or action challenged in the suit, adding that the court would have to determine whether the case concerned the conduct of the primary or a distinct subsequent decision on the recognition of the party’s candidate.

According to him, a subsequent administrative decision does not automatically revive a cause of action that has become statute-barred.

Where a suit is filed outside the applicable constitutional period, he added, a favourable decision on its merits cannot cure the jurisdictional defect.

On the reported finding that Okorocha secured the majority of votes at the primary, Ahiakwo said the court could intervene where credible evidence established that the declared result did not reflect the lawful outcome, provided it had jurisdiction and the law permitted the remedy granted.

He also rejected the suggestion that Section 183 of the Constitution automatically disqualifies Uzodimma from being nominated for a senatorial seat because he is still governor, explaining that the provision prohibits a governor from holding another executive office or paid employment while in office.

Ahiakwo, however, cautioned against reaching a definitive conclusion on the judgment without examining its certified true copy and the relevant court processes.

He said the central question was whether the court properly addressed the constitutional time limit before determining who lawfully won the APC primary.

“The Constitution, not political influence, must determine who is lawfully entitled to a party’s nomination,” he said.