What came as an astonishment to many was that all the court processes were achieved within 10 days from the filing of the suit by a top chieftain of the Action Alliance, Nduka Edede, to the date of the judgement. Funnily enough, the National Assembly which passed the Bill was not joined in the contentious suit. In the judgment, Justice Evelyn Anyadike ruled that Section 84 (12) was “unconstitutional, invalid, illegal, null, void and of no effect whatsoever.” She also directed the AGF to “forthwith delete the said sub-section 12 of Section 84 from the body of the Electoral Act 2022”. The judgement aligned with the protestation of the President when he signed into law the bill known as the Electoral Act Amendment Bill 2022 into law after a brief stalemate between the legislature and the executive on its content.The sudden judgement acceded to the position of the defendant that Sections 66 (1) (f), 107(1) (f),137 (1) (f) and 182 (1) (f) of the constitution which states that “No person shall be qualified for election into the Senate or House of Reps if: (f) he is a person employed in the public service of the federation or of any state and has not resigned, withdrawn or retired from such employment 30 days before the date of election.” The judgement extended same treatment required of civil servants to public office holders. Meanwhile, Section 84 (12) of the Electoral Act bars serving political office holders, including commissioners, ministers and special advisers, from participating as delegate of the primaries in their respective parties or as candidates for any election. It further prescribes a reprimand in Section 84 (13) as a consequence for the disobedience of the Act, thus, “Where a political party fails to comply with the provision of this Act in the conduct of its primaries, its candidate for election shall not be included in the election for the particular position in issue.”The contentious clause was included in the Electoral Act despite resistance by President Buhari. However, based on the assurances made by the leadership of the National Assembly to the President that lawmakers would revisit the clause as soon as the President signed the bill into law, the President appended his signature to the bill. Unfortunately for the President who had always been assured that both arms of the 9th National Assembly were under the sure footed control of both the ruling party and the Presidency, it was a shock to them when the two chambers of the National Assembly rejected the bill sent to them by the President to remove the section considered as belligerent by the President and his allies. Recall that same legislators had hurriedly succumbed to the removal of the mandatory use of direct primaries by political parties in the electoral amendment bill instead of overriding the President’s veto. The unanimous refusal of both chambers to remove the clause after it had been passed did not only bruise the ego of the presidency, it also had far-reaching implications for the AGF, who was rumoured to have interest in becoming the governorship candidate of the ruling party in Kebbi State. Other ministers and commissioners, who also have stakes within the ruling party, realised it could be a move by the lawmakers to disempower them ahead of the 2023 generation elections. In fact, the President expressed concerns in his letter to the National Assembly that the clause in the Electoral Act would disenfranchise serving political officers. The President suggested that a 30-day grace be given for political office holders interested in contesting or participating in politics to relinquish their offices.However, both the Senate and the House of Representatives have decided to appeal the judgement of Justice Anyadike. The Speaker of the House, Femi Gbajamiabila, after listening to lawmakers, who stressed that the judiciary usurped their powers and ridiculed them with the judgment, noted that he would not allow the alleged mistake by the judge to stand. In a similar vein, the Senate queried the suit filed in a distant state outside the location of all the interested parties. As an interested party to the issue, the senators also vowed to appeal the said judgment.For the legislature, the unanimous crafting of the Electoral Act and the contentious section represent the aspirations of majority of the citizens and the constituents they represent in the country. They, therefore, considered it mischievous for the judiciary to order that the section of the law which they also argued was not in contrast to the provision of the constitution, be expunged by the ACF. Some lawyers are also angry with the pronouncement of the court on the issue. To legal experts like Femi Falana and Samson Osagie, the judgement was suspicious. They were together in saying the process that led to the delivery of the judgment was unacceptable.