The passage of the Electoral Act 2022 and its signing into law in February this year by President Buhari was hailed across the land as a good development for our democratic advancement. The Electoral Act has several innovations and stipulates time-frames for almost all the activities pertaining to the elections; from publication of notices of election by INEC to the conduct of party primaries and also assigns adjudicatory role to the judiciary.

Specifically, it confers the role of adjudicating on all pre-election cases on the Federal High Court and limits the disposal of all such cases to a maximum of 180 days. The Federal High Court is available in every state of the federation and it is often said that the Federal High Court is one.

The spirit behind the enactment of the law is positive and salutary. It takes pre-election matters away from the purview of the States’ High Courts. It is alleged that some states’ High Courts are easily influenced by their host state governments because they are too tied to their apron strings. The Federal High Courts on the other hand are not under the influence of the state governments.

But, as patriotic and altruistic as that decision may be by the lawmakers, it has come with fresh challenges for the judiciary at the level of Federal High Courts. The Courts are understaffed and are under tremendous pressure because there’s a deluge of cases, therefore putting much burden on the Judges who have to dispense with all pre-election cases within 180 days.

Addressing his audience at the commencement of the 2022/2023 legal year, the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court tabled the matter and the frustration of his arm of the judiciary on the matter saying that the National Assembly didn’t consult that arm of the judiciary before amending the Electoral Act 2022 and pushing more responsibilities on the Federal High Court.

Justice John Tsoho, the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, while delivering a speech at the 2022/2023 legal year ceremony of the Federal High Court in Abuja noted that the existing high-volume of cases present enormous challenges. The current number of judges of the court which was put at 75 according to him is still short of the constitutionally set limit of 100, assuring that though the process for the appointment of 15 more judges for the court is ongoing, “there is a crying need to speedily increase the maximum number of judges for the court,”

The Federal High Court has a total of 1, 838 pre-election cases filed before it, out of which 1, 285 cases have been disposed of, leaving a total of 556 cases pending. Before the party primaries “a total number of 135,592 cases were pending before the court at the end of the last legal year, comprising 41,788 civil cases, 31,832 criminal cases; 39,799 motions and 22,173 fundamental rights enforcement applications.

Justice Tsoho said in a way, additional jurisdiction had been conferred on the FHC by the new Electoral (Amendment) Act, 2022, by virtue of Sections 29 (5) and 84(14), of the Electoral Act, exclusive jurisdiction is foisted on the Federal High Court in the hearing and determination of pre-election complaints.

“Linked to that jurisdiction is Section 285 (10) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), which provides that such pre-election cases must be concluded within 180 days from the date of filing of the suit. This is notwithstanding the judges’ existing ‘high-volume’ dockets that present enormous challenges.

“It is necessary to place on record that the Electoral (Amendment) Act, 2022, was enacted without any consultation with the Court. Also, no support whatsoever was provided to address the increased responsibility,” he said.

The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) criticised the National Assembly for vesting the exclusive jurisdiction of hearing and determining pre-election cases on the Federal High Court. speaking at the occasion, Mr. Yakubu Maikyau, NBA’s President said: “We fault the decision of the National Assembly to limit the hearing and determination of pre-election matters to this court without regard for its infrastructural and manpower deficit.

“The suspension of the hearing of such matters comes with grave consequences on the economy and affects the confidence of investors.” The added workload “takes a great toll on the health of the Judges of this Court who are at the moment poorly remunerated.” Mr. Maikyau said.

But as a way out, the Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria, (BoSAN), has advocated for the establishment of a National Constitutional Court in the country.

Delivering a speech on behalf of the body in Abuja, BoSAN representative, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN noted that the proposed court will be saddled with the responsibility of determining all electoral cases in the country, adding that Nigeria has reached a stage when the Parliament, Judiciary and stakeholders in the administration of Justice should consider the establishment of the National Constitutional Court of Nigeria.

It took a lot of pressure from Nigerians to get the National Assembly to pass the 2022 amendments to the Electoral Act. The National Assembly is constitutionally vested with several functions prominent among them are lawmaking, representation, oversight and a host of others. In carrying out its lawmaking duty, the legislature sets aside a time for public hearing. One would have expected the judiciary to have availed itself such an opportunity to make its opinion known and perhaps the national Assembly could have had some midway solutions proffered.

A more pragmatic approach, however, is for the number of judges in the Federal High Court to be raised to the constitutionally prescribed level so that it can function at its maximum capacity. Another way to look at the problem is to console the our Judges by saying elections are seasonal and after the 180 days of hard work, the workload of the Court would be drastically reduced and normalcy restored.

Nevertheless, it is commendable that the Chief Judge seized the occasion to put the matter affecting his Court on the front burner. Everybody should draw a lesson from his complaints and in the enactment of future laws or amendments to existing laws, all factors including the capacity of the Courts and that of enforcement agencies are taken into consideration.