The battle over deregistration of the African Democratic Congress, ADC, and four other political parties took a dramatic turn, yesterday, as the Court of Appeal in Abuja halted execution of the Federal High Court judgment ordering their removal from the register of Independent National Electroral Commission, INEC.
The appellate court, in a unanimous ruling by a three-member panel, led by Justice A.B. Mohammed, severely criticised the lower court for proceeding with its judgment, despite an earlier order directing it to suspend action in the matter, describing the conduct as a violation of judicial hierarchy.
INEC supported the application for stay, saying it was not informed of delivery of the judgment and only learned of it through media reports.
The affected parties, including ADC, Action Alliance, Action Peoples Party, Accord Party and Zenith Labour Party, had been accused by the National Forum of Former Legislators, NFFL, of failing to meet electoral performance thresholds set out in Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), as reinforced by the Electoral Act 2022 and INEC’s regulations.
The forum, in a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/2026, prayed the court presided over Justice Peter Lifu, to order INEC to deregister them, and it was granted.
The lower court’s ruling sparked outrage among opposition figures and civil society groups who warned against actions capable of shrinking Nigeria’s democratic space, ahead of the 2027 elections.
While critics described the move as an attempt to weaken opposition parties, legal supporters of the judgment insisted it merely enforced constitutional provisions requiring political parties to meet minimum electoral standards.
Appeal court order
Ordering stay of execution of the lower court order following an application from INEC, the appellate court berated Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja for flouting an order it made on May 22, which directed him to suspend proceedings before him.
It held that Justice Lifu’s action amounted to an affront on the hierarchy of courts, adding that his action was “the highest form of judicial impertinence, ”stressing that the Supreme Court previously held that a judge who acted in such manner “is unfit for the bench as it amounts to judicial rascality.”
“Courts are enjoined to protect their integrity. This Court has supervisory authority over the trial court. The decision of the lower court to proceed with the judgment despite the express order of this court is a brazen violation of the hierarchy of the court and the 1999 Constitution.
“This court has the duty to invoke its powers in ensuring that its orders are made.
“The application for stay of execution is here yet granted. The enforcement of the judgment is stayed,” the appellate court held.
Parties, INEC seek stay of execution of verdict
The electoral umpire had earlier asked the Court of Appeal to stay execution of the judgment ordering deregistration of the five parties and threw its weight behind a notice of appeal lodged by the political parties.
Addressing a three-member panel of the appellate court, the electoral body said it was shocked by the decision of Justice Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja to deliver the judgment, despite an order that stopped him from doing so.
INEC, through its team of lawyers, led by Mr. Haliru Mohammed, said it was not notified that judgment would be delivered, saying it only heard about the court’s decision through media reports.
“We are aware of an order that this court made on May 22, which stopped delivery of the judgment of the lower court, which was initially reserved for delivery on June 5.
“We were not aware of any notice from the court regarding delivery of the judgment. We only saw it as breaking news in the media. We therefore do not oppose the application of the appellant to stay execution of the judgment,” the commission said.
Invitation to anarchy
Similarly, counsel to ADC, Mr. Shuaibu Aruwa, SAN, told the appellate court that Justice Lifu notified the party of the delivery of the judgment via WhatsApp.
Insisting that the decision of the high court was an invitation to anarchy, counsel to the ADC urged the appellate court to invoke its powers and sanction Justice Lifu for disrespecting judicial hierarchy.
“Sincerely, a lot has happened to the judiciary and this profession. What the trial judge did was dare this Court of Appeal by insisting that no one could arrest his judgment, even after his attention was drawn to the stay order from this court.
“The action of the trial judge calls for swift and extraordinary measures from this court. We have come to the stage where this court should press the reset button.
“We are calling on this court to exercise disciplinary jurisdiction under Section 6 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.
“We urge this court to take disciplinary steps by immediately suspending that judgment. This court has the power to protect its own integrity. We pray this court suspends the judgment immediately without further delay,” ADC’s lawyer submitted.
The other parties also drew attention of the appellate court panel to the fact that on June 20, INEC will conduct by-elections in six states of the federation.
They contended that if the judgment was not stayed, it would create problems across the country, maintaining that the Court of Appeal has inherent powers to act in a supervisory capacity and not allow its orders to be disregarded by lower courts.
Judge declines to hands off ADC case, orders Mark, Aregbesola to pay N1m fine
Meanwhile, Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja, yesterday, declined to recuse himself from the suit seeking to remove the Senator David Mark-led executives of the ADC.
He said there was no cogent or verifiable reason he should hands off the case, and consequently awarded costs of N500,000 each against Senator David Mark and Rauf Aregbesola, who are the Chairman and Secretary of the ADC leadership that is being challenged, for filing the recusal application, which he said was aimed at frustrating speedy determination of the case.
Justice Lifu held that the application lacked merit, as no evidence was adduced to establish his bias.
Consequently, he fixed June 23 for accelerated hearing of the suit, which was brought before the court by a former National Deputy Chairman (North-East) of ADC, Nafiu Bala Gombe.
Gombe had approached the court to challenge the legality of the Senator Mark-led Caretaker Committee of the ADC.
Aside from INEC, all the defendants in the suit demanded Justice Lifu’s recusal from the matter. Listed as defendants in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025 are the ADC, INEC, Senator Mark, Aregbesola, and Chief Ralph Nwosu.
Gombe is contending that with the resignation of the former National Chairman, Chief Nwosu, he was qualified to assume the party’s leadership.
He is praying the court to nullify all actions taken on behalf of the party by the Senator Mark-led leadership.
The plaintiff is further urging the court to restrain Mark and Aregbesola from parading themselves as national chairman and secretary, respectively, of the ADC, insisting that their emergence violated the party’s constitution and the provisions of the Electoral Act.
Although only five defendants were initially listed in the suit, the National Welfare Secretary of the party, Nkemakolam Ukandu, filed a motion to be joined as an interested party whose rights could be impacted by the outcome of the case.
Ukandu also joined in asking Justice Lifu to return the case file to the Chief Judge for reassignment.
He drew the court’s attention to the fact that the party had already petitioned both Justice Lifu and the Chief Judge before the National Judicial Council, NJC, adding that the two had also been sued over handling of legal disputes involving the ADC.
However, the plaintiff, through his team of lawyers, led by Mr. Robert Emukpero, SAN, urged the court to dismiss the motions as grossly lacking in merit, insisting they were mere ploys to delay the hearing.
Gombe’s lawyer insisted that the defendants failed to adduce any evidence to establish that the trial judge exhibited any form of bias against them.
It will be recalled that the case was previously before Justice Emeka Nwite, who delayed hearing to await the outcome of an interlocutory appeal Senator Mark filed before the Supreme Court to challenge the jurisdiction of the court to interfere in a dispute he said bordered on the domestic affairs of a political party.
Following the Supreme Court’s dismissal of the appeal on April 30, Gombe, on May 4, wrote a petition to the Chief Judge requesting reassignment of the suit to another judge, insisting he was no longer confident in Justice Nwite’s ability to determine the matter objectively.
All the defendants opposed the petition, accusing the plaintiff of attempting to frustrate the speedy hearing of the case.
“We also consider it an attempt to frustrate the order for accelerated hearing granted by the Court of Appeal and upheld by the Supreme Court,” said counsel to the first defendant, Mr. Realwan Okpanachi.
Justice Nwite subsequently withdrew from the case, and it was reassigned to Justice Lifu.
Meanwhile, outrage continued to greet Justice Lifu’s verdict ordering deregistration of ADC and four other parties.
It’s an attempt to weaken opposition, undermine democracy —Hashim-Olawepo
Speaking on the issue yesterday, Co-Chairman of the Movement for Democratic Renewal, MDR, and presidential candidate of Accord, Dr. Gbenga Hashim, described the judgment as evidence of a systematic effort to weaken opposition politics and undermine democracy ahead of the 2027 general polls.
Olawepo-Hashim, in a statement by his media office, said the development validates concerns he had repeatedly raised since 2024 regarding what he alleged was a coordinated strategy to make President Bola Tinubu the only viable presidential contender in 2027.
According to him, recent developments in the nation’s political landscape indicate a deliberate and multi-layered effort aimed at weakening opposition parties and restricting political competition.
He recalled that he had consistently warned that opposition governors were being pressured to defect to the ruling APC, alleging that those who resisted faced political intimidation and blackmail.
Referring specifically to the Federal High Court’s order directing deregistration of five parties, he said: “This is not only to destabilise the parties, but to ensure that the parties are not able to survive the illegal INEC processes to ensure only Tinubu can be a viable candidate.
“With the latest development from the Federal High Court ordering deregistration of opposition political parties, it is now clear beyond any reasonable doubt that President Tinubu is determined to kill Nigeria’s democracy,” he stated.
Deregister ADC, others, risk national crisis — Timi Frank
Former Deputy National Publicity Secretary of the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC, Timi Frank, warned that any move to deregister the parties could trigger a national crisis and undermine Nigeria’s democratic foundations.
Frank, in a strongly worded statement, described the development as a direct threat to multi-party democracy, alleging that the reported court ruling formed part of a wider effort to weaken opposition forces ahead of the 2027 general elections.
He called on United States President Donald Trump and members of the international community to urgently intervene to preserve Nigeria’s multi-party democracy.
“The judgment came suddenly without prior notice to the parties involved. From information available to us, it appeared that the judgment had been prepared elsewhere and simply delivered by the court,” he alleged.
Describing the ruling as a “mystery judgment,” Frank alleged that it was orchestrated to achieve a pre-determined political outcome, with external interests potentially having influenced its preparation and delivery.
“It must be noted that any attempt by President Bola Tinubu and those working with him to deregister political parties, particularly major opposition parties such as the ADC, will give rise to a crisis that may be difficult to contain,” he said.
Adebayo rejects verdict, offers to lead justice campaign
In like manner, the 2027 Presidential Candidate of the Social Democratic Party, Prince Adewole Adebayo, described the verdict as unconstitutional, undemocratic and a threat to Nigeria’s democratic development, and vowed to support the affected parties in their quest for justice and restoration through lawful means, stressing that democratic participation should never be restricted.
Adebayo on his X handle yesterday said that there was no constitutional, legal or moral justification for alternative political platforms to be suppressed through government action backed by judicial orders.
We won’t allow one-party state — Accord
On its part, the Accord Party rejected the judgment and expressed concern that recent developments in the political space could weaken the multiparty system that underpins democratic governance.
The position was stated by the Ogun State Chairman of the Accord Party, Mr. Rotimi Oke, during a telephone interview with Vanguard.
“We do not want a one-party state, and we believe political pluralism must be protected. That is our concern,” Oke said.
Resist undemocratic move — Ameh
Speaking on the issue, Acting National Chairman of the Inter-Party Advisory Council, IPAC, Chief Peter Ameh, urged Nigerians and stakeholders to resist “undemocratic moves” to deregister parties.
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. This hostile executive rascality and brazen judicial overreach must not be allowed to stand,” he said,
It’s threat to our democracy, Says CNPP
On its part, the Conference of Nigeria Political Parties, CNPP, In a statement by its Deputy National Publicity Secretary Comrade James Ezema, said: “This judgment represents not merely a legal controversy but a direct assault on Nigeria’s constitutional democracy, multiparty political system, and the fundamental rights of citizens to freely associate and participate in the democratic process through political platforms of their choice.
“More disturbing is the active role played by the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Prince Lateef Fagbemi-SAN, who did not merely remain a nominal defendant in the matter but reportedly deployed the weight and authority of his office to formally support a suit seeking the deregistration of opposition political parties.” the statement reads
CNPP also revealed its view of the development as a pattern to weaken the opposition parties and favour the ruling Party.
“What Nigerians are witnessing today increasingly resembles a full-scale state capture operation. A situation where formal institutions, legal frameworks, regulatory agencies and public authorities are manipulated by powerful political actors and their allies to secure predetermined political, economic and legal outcomes in their favour.
“Democracy ceases to exist in any meaningful sense when political competition is no longer determined by voters at the ballot box but by carefully orchestrated administrative and judicial maneuvers designed to eliminate competitors before elections even take place.”
Verdict upholds constitution, not politics — Ondo AG Ajulo
However, Ondo State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Dr. Kayode Ajulo, SAN, has said that the court verdict deregistering the five parties upheld constitutional provisions, not political interests.
Ajulo described the ruling as a “faithful interpretation of constitutional provisions.”
“The law is clear and leaves little room for sentiment or political convenience. Justice Lifu did not create the law; he simply interpreted and applied it as enacted,” he stated.
He pointed to Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, which empowers INEC to deregister parties that fail to meet specified electoral performance thresholds.
Ajulo stressed that the constitutional amendments were assented to by former President Muhammadu Buhari in 2018, predating the current administration.
“The judiciary must remain guided by the law and not by political considerations. Judges are duty-bound to interpret statutes as they exist,” he said.
