Intra-Party Disputes: Court strikes down mandatory ₦10m costs provision in Electoral Act 2026

The Federal High Court in Abuja has declared unconstitutional a provision of the Electoral Act 2026 that imposed a mandatory minimum cost of ₦10 million on lawyers and litigants who institute actions relating to the internal affairs of political parties.

Justice J.K. Omotosho delivered the judgment on July 23, 2026, holding that Section 83(6)(b) of the Electoral Act unlawfully interferes with the constitutional discretion of judges to determine costs in civil proceedings.

The decision was delivered in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/721/2026 filed by legal practitioner Christian Egbuchinem Nduka, trading as Chris & Lawticus, against the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the National Assembly and the Attorney General of the Federation.

The Electoral Act 2026 introduced new provisions aimed at reducing frivolous litigation arising from the internal affairs of political parties, particularly disputes involving party leadership, membership, congresses and internal administration.

Among the reforms was Section 83(6)(b), which prescribed a mandatory minimum cost of ₦10 million against lawyers and litigants who instituted such actions. The provision generated debate within legal circles, with critics arguing that it could discourage access to justice and interfere with the judiciary’s constitutional discretion in awarding costs.

Shortly after the Act became effective, Nduka asked the court to determine whether the mandatory costs provision was inconsistent with constitutional guarantees of judicial independence, access to justice and the powers vested in courts.

He argued that the provision imposed an undue burden on legal practitioners and litigants, discouraged lawyers from accepting legitimate briefs and removed the discretion traditionally exercised by judges in awarding costs.

The claimant also challenged the provision directing that costs be paid to INEC, contending that the Commission, being publicly funded, should not automatically benefit from penalties imposed on litigants.

In its judgment, the court held that although the National Assembly may enact laws to discourage frivolous litigation, it cannot compel judges to impose predetermined costs without regard to the facts and circumstances of individual cases. The court added that the assessment and award of costs remain an inherent judicial function that cannot be dictated by legislation.

Justice Omotosho stated: “The fixing of a minimum fine of ₦10,000,000.00 on Counsel and Claimant interferes with the discretion of the Court. The Court cannot be limited or constrained regarding the costs to be imposed on erring parties.”

The court further ruled that regulations governing costs in proceedings before the Federal High Court fall within the authority of the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court through the Rules of Court and Practice Directions.

However, Justice Omotosho upheld Section 83(5) of the Electoral Act 2026, holding that it merely codifies existing Supreme Court decisions that disputes relating to party leadership, membership, congresses and internal administration are generally not justiciable.

The judge clarified, however, that the provision does not prevent courts from hearing pre-election disputes recognised under the Constitution and the Electoral Act, including challenges arising from party primaries and alleged breaches of electoral laws.

Justice Omotosho also struck out the National Assembly as a defendant after finding that the claimant failed to comply with the statutory requirement of serving a three-month pre-action notice before commencing proceedings against the legislature.

On the issue of costs payable to INEC, the court rejected the claimant’s argument, holding that the electoral body is entitled to recover legitimate litigation expenses where it incurs costs defending election-related cases.

Reacting to the judgment, Nduka, who represented himself, described the decision as a victory for judicial independence, lawyers and access to justice.

He said the ruling prevents the mandatory enforcement of the ₦10 million costs provision against lawyers and litigants while reaffirming the constitutional discretion of judges to determine appropriate costs based on the circumstances of each case.

Counsel who appeared in the matter included A.I. Lemu, SAN, assisted by Augustine Obinna Onu, L.E. Nyibian and S.A. Nna for INEC; Tolulope Asuni for the National Assembly; and Emono Bwacha for the Attorney General of the Federation.

Under Nigerian law, the award of costs in civil proceedings has traditionally been a matter for the discretion of the trial judge, exercised after considering the facts, the conduct of the parties and the circumstances of each case.

The Federal High Court’s decision reinforces that long-established principle while maintaining the position that disputes relating solely to the internal affairs of political parties generally remain outside the jurisdiction of the courts, except where the Constitution or the Electoral Act expressly provides otherwise.