| dc.description.abstract | Available literatures showed that election related litigations are on the increase and the resultant judgements, in some cases, controversial and conflicting. Some of the reasons for this, it was observed are that the relevant laws and regulations governing elections in Nigeria are replete with deficiencies, which, among others, necessitated the resort to discretionary powers by the courts to fill up the gaps. The deficiencies and the consequent exercise of judicial discretion, to a larger extent, had negative impact on the sustenance and deepening of Nigeria’s democracy. A situation that demanded for research and necessary actions. The research identified and examined the defects, ambiguities and lacunae in the relevant electoral laws and regulations particularly the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) and the resultant effects of the exercise of judicial discretion by the courts on the mandate of the people. The overwhelming importance of democracy and the need for its sustenance demanded for research on how the mandate of the people was affected by the exercise of judicial discretionary powers. The methodology adopted in the work is doctrinal with the aid of statutes, case laws, textbooks, articles and journals, opinion of scholars and internet materials. The study discovered that the resultant effects of the deficiencies in the Electoral laws prompted judicialization of elections in Nigeria which in turn necessitated resort to discretionary powers by the courts. The study found that the courts in some cases abused or misapplied its discretionary powers for some reasons such as personal, political, religious or economic interest. The periodical amendments of the relevant laws and regulations were a consequence of the prevalence of pre and post election disputes and the corresponding judicial decisions coupled with societal dynamics and overwhelming desire by Nigerians for credible and acceptable elections. The election petition cases analyzed in the work showed that the resort to discretion by the courts is rampant and often led to conflicting judgments which in some cases were against the electoral wishes of the voters. The study recommended that the electoral laws and regulations should be periodically amended to cure the deficiencies and the gaps. The research recommended that controversial election related decisions should be reviewed by the National Judicial Council, NJC, or a judicial Committee set up for that purpose. The work having discovered that exercise of judicial discretion by the courts particularly in post-election matters is inevitable further recommended that amendments of the electoral laws and regulations should be geared towards ensuring that such exercise must be judicially and judiciously done. The study particularly recommended for an introduction of electronic voting and transmission systems into the Electoral Acts. | en_US |
