Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Leave to challenge presidential nomination process refused as High Court rules political decisions non-justiciable
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
The High Court refused leave to seek judicial review to an applicant who challenged the 2025 presidential nomination process as unconstitutional, unfair, and undemocratic, claiming political parties had orchestrated the exclusion of independent candidates. The court held that the process was conducted in accordance with the Constitution and relevant legislation, finding no evidence or legal basis for the applicant's rights being breached, nor any justiciable grounds for the relief sought. The judge emphasised that issues concerning political decisions, party discipline, and the structure of nomination were matters for the legislature or the people by referendum, not for the courts. As a result, all reliefs sought—including orders to rerun the election and declarations of illegality—were refused, with costs awarded to the respondents.
leave to seek judicial review – presidential nomination process – constitutional law – political party whip – independent candidates – municipal councils – Protected Disclosures Act 2014 – Article 12 of the Constitution – Article 28A of the Constitution – democracy – access to justice – non-justiciable political decisions – Rules of the Superior Courts (RSC) – Legislation vs judicial role – costs
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
