AN EXPOSITION OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF LEGAL REASONING IN PRE-ELECTION MATTERS IN NIGERIA

This paper examines the problem of the persistent challenge of pre-election litigation within Nigeria"s electoral jurisprudence.Despite an established legal framework, a high volume of lawsuits arising from party primaries recurs each electoral cycle, raising concerns about the perceived rationality of judicial reasoning and its impact on electoral justice.This study adopts a doctrinal approach and traces the development of judicial thought on pre-election matters in the Fourth Republic, identifying the forms of legal reasoning employed and proposing pathways towards enhanced party selfregulation.Using the doctrinal approach, the study conducted a thematic analysis of purposively selected pre-election cases decided before the 2023 general elections.The study finds a predominance of strict textualism in the cases analysed which also shows how arguments from text provides interpretative clarity and consistency.However, an emergent category of issues, based on a "likelihood of a breach" of electoral law, is identified as operating outside the statutory definition of pre-election matters thereby creating jurisdictional ambiguity.A central conclusion is that the predictable outcomes of textualism are undermined by the persistent failure of political parties to adhere to clear electoral laws and utilise internal dispute resolution mechanisms.To address these issues, the study recommends the inclusion of judicial exposition of emerging concepts over reliance on precedent, mandated proficiency in electoral law for party officials, and an amendment to the Electoral Act 2022 to introduce mandatory mediation as a preliminary dispute resolution step, leveraging the Arbitration and Mediation Act 2023 to reduce judicial caseloads and foster intra-party democracy.