TITLE:
Examining Judicial Precedents’ Dilemma in Conflicting Decisions on Electoral Disputes in Nigeria
AUTHORS:
Zacchaeus Olalere Alayinde, Emmanuel Folayan Ijalana
KEYWORDS:
Electoral Process, Judgment, Judicial Precedent, Conflicting Decisions, Legitimacy, Election Disputes
JOURNAL NAME:
Beijing Law Review,
Vol.16 No.1,
March
27,
2025
ABSTRACT: Conflicting rulings or decisions on electoral matters by courts with coordinate jurisdiction in Nigeria had emerged as a persistent problem in the pursuit of justice. Against this development, this paper examined the judicial practices with professional observance in election litigations and the successive electoral laws in Nigeria. This was with a view to evaluating its nature and scope as well as containing its impacts on the litigants in election dispute, and on the integrity of the Nigerian courts. The paper employed doctrinal approach in its methodology and relied on both primary and secondary sources of information. The primary source included successive constitutions in Nigeria, various electoral laws, judgment of courts and judicial precedents while secondary source comprised scholarly texts, journal articles, newspapers, magazine, and the internet. Data collected were subjected to content analysis. The paper found that, though adequate provisions in extant laws were emplaced for the realisation of the noble objectives of electoral process in Nigeria, conflicting decisions continued to taunt its legitimacy. It further found that the consequences of these unwholesome practices were not restricted to dampened public image of the judiciary in Nigeria, it violated the universal sacredness and the fundamentals of the concept of judicial precedent. The paper, therefore, contended that, unless regular training with retraining of judicial officers in this direction was made a priority, electoral process in Nigeria would continue to lose its legitimacy.