Constitutional lawyer and public affairs analyst Justice Osai Ahiakwo has challenged the legal foundation of a Federal High Court ruling that recognised former Imo State governor Rochas Okorocha as the All Progressives Congress candidate for the Imo West Senatorial District in the 2027 election.
Key takeaways
- The Federal High Court directed the APC to acknowledge Rochas Okorocha as its Imo West senatorial candidate.
- Justice Obiora Egwuatu also restrained Governor Hope Uzodimma from holding himself out as the party’s candidate for the seat.
- Ahiakwo questioned whether Okorocha’s lawsuit met the Constitution’s 14-day deadline for pre-election disputes.
- The APC’s reported primary election took place on May 18, 2026, while the case was filed on August 13.
- The analyst said Section 183 does not by itself bar a serving governor from seeking a Senate nomination.
Constitutional deadline at centre of dispute
Ahiakwo said the key legal issue is whether the court first established its jurisdiction before moving to the substantive question of who won the party primary. The ruling, delivered by Justice Obiora Egwuatu, ordered Uzodimma to stop presenting himself as the APC nominee and instructed the party to recognise Okorocha.
In his assessment of the judgment, Ahiakwo referred to Section 285(9) of the amended 1999 Constitution. The provision requires pre-election lawsuits to be commenced within 14 days from the occurrence, decision or action being contested.
He noted that the APC was reported to have held its Imo West senatorial primary on May 18, 2026, whereas Okorocha filed his suit on August 13. That timeline, he said, creates a significant issue over whether the claim was brought within the constitutionally mandated window.
However, Ahiakwo said the outcome would depend on the precise act being challenged. The court would need to establish whether Okorocha disputed the conduct of the primary itself or instead challenged a separate later decision involving the party’s recognition of its candidate.
Jurisdiction must precede merits
A subsequent administrative step cannot necessarily restore a legal claim that has already become time-barred, Ahiakwo said. If a case is lodged after the applicable constitutional deadline, a ruling in favour of the claimant on the underlying facts cannot correct the jurisdictional problem.
On reports that Okorocha received the highest number of votes in the primary, he said a court may intervene if reliable evidence shows that the announced result differed from the lawful outcome. Such intervention, however, would depend on the court having jurisdiction and on the remedy being available under the law.
Ahiakwo also dismissed the argument that Section 183 of the Constitution automatically prevents Uzodimma from pursuing nomination for a Senate seat while serving as governor. He said the provision stops a governor from simultaneously occupying another executive position or undertaking paid employment during the term of office.
He cautioned that no final assessment of the ruling should be made without reviewing the certified true copy of the judgment and the relevant court filings. The central issue, he said, is whether the court properly dealt with the constitutional limitation period before deciding who legitimately won the APC primary.
“The Constitution, rather than political influence, must decide who is legally entitled to a party nomination,” Ahiakwo said.
