Scholars of electoral studies and democratisation are becoming more interested in the topic of courts’ involvement in the Nigerian political system. Pre-election lawsuits involving intra-party disputes appear to have become a major focus of the nation’s electoral process, particularly since the present democratic regime was established in 1999. This paper examined party politics and pre-election litigations in Nigeria’s Fourth Republic using the Supreme Court’s rulings in pre-election cases involving All Progressives Congress (APC) members in Zamfara State as a case study. The study’s methodology was qualitative as it relied on secondary sources, while the method of data analysis was thematic analysis. Theoretically, this study adopted the postulations of Pareto, Michels and Mosca’s elite theory as a theoretical foundation. Among other things, the study found that the political fallout from Zamfara State’s APC candidate selection process had a detrimental impact on participation, representation, competition, and responsiveness. Zamfara State’s pre-election lawsuit conflicts, as well as Nigeria’s pre-election litigation laws generally, have sparked a number of worries about the nation’s electoral process and, inevitably, the stability and consolidation of its democracy. This paper therefore concluded that pre-election litigations have had deleterious impact on the electoral process of Nigeria and could have been avoided if political parties are allowed to resolve intra-party disputes by themselves or in conjunction with INEC. The study recommended among other things that party discipline should be strict for all members in the parties irrespective of whose ox is gored. In this regard, the leadership of the parties should be answerable to the members and members, in turn, will be required to respect and obey the leadership.