The Court of Appeal in Abuja, on Tuesday, nullified the judgment of the Federal High Court ordering the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and four other political parties.
In a unanimous judgment delivered by a three-member panel of justices led by Justice Abba Mohammed, the appellate court held that the June 15 judgment of the Federal High Court was a nullity, having been delivered without jurisdiction.
The appellate court held that the trial court wrongly assumed jurisdiction and made the order on an incompetent suit filed by a non-juristic entity.
It held that there was no valid suit that could have warranted the consequential order directing INEC to deregister the affected political parties.
The appellate court further held that the trial court failed to properly evaluate the evidence before it, noting that proof showing the parties had won various elective seats in previous elections was ignored.
It also held that the lower court acted in defiance of an order directing it to stay proceedings pending the determination of an interlocutory appeal.
The appellate court consequently held that the Federal High Court ought to have dismissed the substantive suit for want of jurisdiction and merit.
It allowed the separate appeals filed by the political parties, restored their registration, and awarded costs against the National Forum of Former Legislators, which instituted the suit.
The affected parties are the African Democratic Congress, Action Peoples Party, Action Alliance, Accord Party and Zenith Labour Party.
The appellate court declared that all the affected political parties remain duly registered.
The appellate court had, on June 16, stayed the execution of the trial court’s judgment pending the determination of the appeals.
In its decision, the panel faulted the conduct of Justice Peter Lifu for proceeding with the case, despite an earlier order made on May 22 directing him to stay proceedings pending the outcome of the appeal.
The appellate court noted that although Justice Lifu’s attention had been drawn to the stay order, he proceeded to deliver judgment.
It described the action as “a form of judicial impertinence,” adding that the Supreme Court had previously held that a judge who acts in such a manner “is unfit for the bench, as the conduct amounts to judicial rascality.”
Justice Lifu had ordered INEC to deregister the five political parties after holding that they failed to satisfy the constitutional requirements for their continued existence.
He also restrained INEC from recognising the parties, accepting candidates sponsored by them or giving effect to their activities ahead of the 2027 general elections.
The judgment followed a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/2026, instituted by the National Forum of Former Legislators.
The plaintiff had asked the court to determine whether INEC was constitutionally bound under Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), the Electoral Act 2022 and its regulations, to deregister political parties that failed to meet prescribed electoral performance thresholds.
The forum argued that the affected parties failed to secure at least 25 per cent of votes in a state during a presidential election, or win at least one elective seat at the national, state or local government levels as required by law.
It further contended that the parties’ poor performance in the 2023 general election and subsequent by-elections rendered their continued registration unconstitutional and detrimental to the integrity of the electoral process.
The Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), who was joined as a defendant in the suit, supported the plaintiffs’ case, arguing that retaining the affected political parties was inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution and undermined the country’s electoral integrity.
Dissatisfied with the Federal High Court judgment, the affected political parties and INEC filed separate appeals, urging the Court of Appeal to set it aside.
The appellate court upheld the appeals and vacated the judgment in its entirety.
