Friday in Abuja, Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court frowned at the attitude of Johnmary Jideobi, the plaintiff, and his lawyer, Ndubuisi Ukpai, for their lack of diligence in pursuing a suit filed to bar former President Goodluck Jonathan from contesting the 2027 presidential election.

The judge described the delay tactics of both the plaintiff and his lawyer, which have been instrumental in delaying proceedings in the case as “unacceptable.” Consequently, he imposed a fine of one million Naira against the plaintiff, to be paid to former president Jonathan.

“I have carefully and painstakingly considered all the submissions and prayers of the learned counsel in this matter. As this court has earlier ruled and ordered, this case has a character of politics. I have taken judicial notice of the timetable of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

“The duty of this court is to ensure that political cases are given accelerated hearing and disposed of expeditiously. In that wise, and as earlier stated, this court reiterates the provisions of the National Judicial Policy in case management”, the court held.

Justice Lifu queried why the plaintiff filed the suit since October 6, 2025, but had not deemed it fit to serve ordering it “is hereby granted grace of two hours from now, that is 10:30 am, to serve all the processes on INEC and the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), who are 2nd and 3rd defendants in the suit.

“The 2nd and 3rd defendants are hereby ordered to file and serve their responses, if any, before 11am on Monday, 18th of May, 2026.

“By consent of counsel, this suit is adjourned to May 18th, 2026, by 12 noon for definite hearing of the originating summons and all pending applications,” Justice Lifu held.

He gave account of how counsel for the former president (1st defendant), Chief Chris Uche, SAN, told the court on May 8, when the case came up that they got the information about the suit in the media and decided to file and serve their processes.

The judge expressed disappointment also that on May 11, neither Jideobi, who is also a lawyer, nor Ukpai was in court despite fixing the hearing time at 2 pm at the instance of the plaintiff’s lawyer on May 5.

He further noted that though Uche asked for a N5 million cost, the request was not granted in the interest of fair hearing.

“On May 11 , this court refused to grant the 1st defendant’s application for a cost of N5 million. Today, it is crystal clear that the plaintiff did not serve the originating summons on the 2nd and 3rd defendants since October 6, 2025.

“This case is for hearing today and the hearing has been frustrated or aborted due to the tardiness of the plaintiff who is a lawyer by training and calling. Hearing cannot go on now. Consequently, I hold that punishment should lie where the fault is.

“I hereby award the cost of N1 million against the plaintiff but in favour of the 1st defendant only. I so rule” Justice Lifu held.

Earlier, when the case was called on Friday, 15th May 2026, neither Jideobi nor Ukpai was in court again, but counsel to the former president, Uche, and AGF’s counsel, J. D. Esho, were in court.

Justice Lifu then confirmed from the registrar if the plaintiff and INEC were served with hearing notices.

The former president’s lawyer, therefore, applied that the case be dismissed with substantial cost due to the plaintiff’s continued absence in court.

Uche said the plaintiff and his lawyer did not see the reason to either write to the court or the defendants on why they would not be in court.

The senior lawyer said Jideobi and Ukpai, in their manner, had portrayed absolute disdain and disrespect to the court and expressed surprise that the plaintiff, who initiated the suit, dragged a former Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces of the country to court for nothing and abandoned the case.

“The plaintiff thinks he can hold the court and other parties to ransom, and stay back in the comfort of his house and drag all of us to court,” he said and added, there must be consequence for every action.

“They think the courts are toothless bulldog and the dignity of the court must be protected my lord,” he said and urged the court to invoke its disciplinary power on the plaintiff and dismiss the case as being an abuse of court process.

AGF’s lawyer, Esho, told the court that her office was served with the ex-president’s response to the suit on May 11, saying they were yet to be served with the originating summons of the plaintiff.

The registrar also confirmed that, though INEC was served with hearing notice of the day’s sitting, the commission had not also been served with the plaintiff’s processes.

Midway into the case, Ukpai entered the court and apologised for his lateness.

After taking submissions of all the lawyers, the judge adjourned the matter till May 18 for definite hearing of all pending applications and the substantive suit at 12 noon.

By Our Reporter

The Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (BOSAN) has warned its members against the use of “Dr” title in professional settings after the conferment of honorary doctorate degrees.

Olumide Sofowora Esq, secretary of BOSAN, in a letter of Tuesday, 10th March, 2026, on behalf of the body said it has been inundated with complaints that some Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) are attributing “undeserved titles” to themselves.
Sofowora said some SANs have started prefixing their names with “Doctor” when announcing their appearances in court after receiving honorary doctorate degrees.

Some SANs have even gone further to address themselves as “Professors” with honorary doctorate degrees.

BOSAN echoed the National Universities Commission’s (NUC) stoppage to the wrong use of honorary doctorate degrees, adding that the recipients cannot use the degrees to practice as scholars or for administrative purposes.

The letter regretted that “Some have been reported to be prefixing ‘Doctor’ to their names when announcing their appearance in Court soon after being conferred with Honorary Doctorate Degrees.

“Last month, the National Universities Commission issued the Guidelines for the award and use of Honorary Doctorate Degrees in Nigeria and stated clearly therein in item 13 on the ‘Usage’ of the honorary titles thus:
“The recipients are at liberty to use the approved nomenclature or title of the honorary doctorate degree such as Doctor of Law (honoris Causa) or LL.D. (h.c.) or D.Litt (h.c.) after their names. However, they are not permitted to use “Dr.”, which is reserved for holders of earned degrees and medical professionals.

Additionally, they are not permitted to use the honorary doctorate degree to practise as scholars or professionals, oversee administrative units, or supervise research work.

“The above clarification by the National Universities Commission cannot be more explicit and it is expected that our members will adhere to it.

“More concerning however is the fact that some members have even gone ahead to be addressing themselves as “Professors” after being conferred with Honorary Doctorate Degrees.

“I am therefore calling on our distinguished members of BOSAN to be mindful of the above admonition so that we do not breach the provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners and subject ourselves to disciplinary measures should any of us be found to be according to himself or herself a title that he or she is not entitled to.
“That would amount to fraudulent misrepresentation and false claims to nobility which is a conduct incompatible with the dignity and honour of the rank of a Senior Advocate of Nigeria.

The resort to use of Dr, Prof or other titles by SANs, politicians and other members of the public, may be due to the quest for honour, recognition and or to boost one’s ego in a “Title inflation” society.
The unmerited use, wrongly gained privileges and the abuse of the titles all highlight the unfortunate pervasive perversion of all social strata including the upper middle class and, most unfortunately, among lawyers who belong to the privileged group in Nigeria called SANs. With the abuse of these titles gaining disturbing criminal traction, the urgent need to heed to the advice and admonitions of the National Universities Commission NUC to the public and BOSAN to its members cannot be overemphasized.

There is no alternative to the fact that those who cherish academic titles should take the right route to earn them.

By Our Correspondent

A High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, FCT, has been asked to dismiss the ₦100.5 billion defamation suit instituted against Prof Zacharys Anger Gundu, VC of University of Mkar, Mkar by the Nasarawa State Government and Governor, Abdullahi Sule.

The request is contained in a notice of preliminary objection filed by the defendant through his legal team led by Sebastian Hon, SAN.

Gundu flawed the competence of the suit, marked FCT/HC/CV/3554/2025, and asked the court to decline jurisdiction, describing the case as frivolous and an abuse of court process.

The legal team said the claimants did not comply with a mandatory condition precedent required for the validity of the originating processes, as stipulated under Order 2 Rule 8 of the FCT High Court Civil Procedure Rules, 2025.

This faulty premise, the alleged non-compliance, the team asserted, renders the suit procedurally defective and liable to be struck out.