Flawed judicial reasoning

This would seem to have been the reasoning behind the decision of the Court of Appeal in the suit challenging the eligibility of Goodluck Jonathan in this month’s presidential election. In upholding an earlier decision of a lower court, the judges unanimously agreed that the tenure of a president can only be determined by election […]

This would seem to have been the reasoning behind the decision of the Court of Appeal in the suit challenging the eligibility of Goodluck Jonathan in this month’s presidential election. In upholding an earlier decision of a lower court, the judges unanimously agreed that the tenure of a president can only be determined by election or elections.
Were a president to have died, impeached, resigned or incapacitated, shortly after having won an election and sworn into office, his or her successor, in this reasoning, has merely done the nation a favour by taking over as president and serving out the unexpired term of another.  It would not have mattered even if this were in excess of 3 years.
He or she could then embark on political journey of their own and be president for another 8 years, if possible!  If only for an academic interest, one is anxious to know what the Supreme Court would have to say on this.

Anthony Akinola, Oxford, UK <[email protected]>;