Former President Goodluck Jonathan on Tuesday called for a national conversation on restructuring Nigeria’s system of government, arguing that the concentration of enormous powers in the presidency is undermining democracy and good governance.
Jonathan also criticised the country’s growing culture of post-election litigation, warning that the courts’ increasing role in determining political outcomes is weakening public confidence in the democratic process.
He spoke at the 2026 Democracy Dialogue organised by the Goodluck Jonathan Foundation in Bauchi.
The former president said Nigeria should consider a parliamentary model similar to those practised in countries such as Switzerland and the United Kingdom, where executive powers are shared rather than concentrated in one office.
‘Probably we need to go back to the pre-independence and early independence days of having a parliamentary system where powers are shared,’ Jonathan said.
According to him, the current presidential system gives one individual excessive authority over national resources, security and governance.
‘In Nigeria today, one person has almost all the powers. We need to have more conversations on the structure of leadership in our governance and what model will best suit our unique circumstances,’ he said.
Jonathan said a parliamentary arrangement would create checks and balances by dividing authority between a prime minister, who manages government and national resources, and a president or ceremonial head of state with limited constitutional responsibilities.
He pointed to Switzerland as an example of a country where major national decisions are made collectively rather than by a single individual.
He argued that such a system could strengthen institutions, empower parliament and reduce the risks associated with excessive presidential authority.
The former president also expressed concern over Nigeria’s culture of election litigation, describing it as unusual compared with other African democracies, where elections are largely settled at the ballot box rather than through prolonged court battles.
‘The Nigerian situation is extremely different from most other African countries,’ he said.
‘The kind of election litigations we experience here is uncommon. I can describe the Nigerian situation as a very anomalous one.’
Jonathan recalled a conversation with a former Deputy President of South Africa during his tenure as vice president, saying she was surprised that Nigerian politicians routinely challenged election results in court after losing.
‘She asked me, ‘Jonathan, why would somebody go to court after losing an election?’ In South Africa, people do not normally go to court after losing an election. In Nigeria, election litigation has become so common that it is often factored into the election process,’ he said.
He maintained that the judiciary must remain independent, impartial and faithful to the law, but noted that public confidence in many political judgments had declined.
The former president said that while criminal offences committed during elections should be prosecuted, some electoral disputes had become unnecessarily politicised and over-litigated.
‘In some highly controversial cases, it is better for the election to go back to the people,’ he said.
Jonathan also criticised what he described as increasing judicial interference in the internal affairs of political parties, particularly in disputes arising from party primaries.
‘Courts now determine who becomes a party’s candidate and, in some cases, which political party should be recognised. That is creating serious uncertainty in Nigeria’s political environment,’ he said.
He stressed that democracy functions as an ecosystem in which political parties, electoral bodies, security agencies, the judiciary, civil society, the media, election observers and voters all have important roles to play.
Jonathan, however, maintained that Nigeria’s democracy would be stronger if electoral disputes were significantly reduced and greater confidence was restored in both elections and judicial decisions, while the country undertook a serious review of its governance structure and the distribution of executive powers.