Follow Us on Google
The Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal has adjourned the hearing in an appeal challenging the deregistration of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), the Accord Party and three other political parties to July 7.
The appellate court shifted the hearing from 25 June, which had been previously scheduled for the matter, to 7 July to enable all parties to file and exchange their respective briefs of argument ahead of the substantive hearing.
At Thursday’s proceedings, counsel to the Accord Party, Mr Musibau Adetunbi, SAN, informed the three-member panel that the record of appeal, including the judgment of the Federal High Court, had only been transmitted to the Court of Appeal on Monday in compliance with legal requirements.
Adetunbi subsequently applied for a short adjournment to allow the parties sufficient time to file and exchange their briefs of argument.
The application was not opposed by the other parties in the suit, prompting the presiding Justice, Justice Abubakar Mohammed, to adjourn the matter until July 7 at 2.00 pm.
Although Adetunbi requested three days to complete the filing and exchange of briefs, Justice Mohammed explained that some members of the panel would be engaged in special court sessions outside Abuja next week, hence the decision to fix July 7 for the hearing.
Justice Peter Odo Lifu of the Federal High Court, Abuja, had in a judgment ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister the ADC and four other political parties on the grounds that they had failed to satisfy constitutional requirements in previous elections.
Despite INEC’s opposition to the suit and its insistence that the affected parties had met the constitutional requirements for continued registration, the trial judge proceeded to order their deregistration.
However, on 16 June, the Court of Appeal ordered a stay of execution of the judgment, holding that the Federal High Court had delivered its decision in flagrant disregard of an earlier order directing that proceedings in the matter be suspended pending the determination of an appeal.
In a unanimous ruling delivered by a three-member panel led by Justice Abubakar Mohammed, the appellate court accused Justice Lifu of disregarding its order of 22 May, which had directed him to halt proceedings in the case.
The court described the action of the trial judge as a violation of the hierarchy of courts and characterised it as “the highest form of judicial impertinence”.
According to the appellate court:
“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 courts and the 1999 Constitution.”
The court consequently granted the application for a stay of execution and ordered that enforcement of the judgment be suspended pending the determination of the appeal.
The appellate court had initially fixed 25 June for the hearing of the substantive appeal before subsequently shifting the date to July 7.
Apart from the ADC, the other political parties affected by the Federal High Court judgment are the Action Peoples Party (APP), Action Alliance (AA), Accord Party (AP) and Zenith Labour Party (ZLP).
Justice Lifu had held that the parties failed to meet the constitutional benchmarks required to justify their continued existence as registered political parties.
The court consequently restrained INEC from recognising the parties, accepting nominations from them or allowing them to participate in preparations for the 2027 general elections.
The judge also ordered the affected parties to cease parading themselves as registered political parties.
The judgment followed a suit instituted by the National Forum of Former Legislators (NFFL), marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/2026.
The plaintiffs had urged the court to determine whether INEC was constitutionally obliged to deregister political parties that failed to meet the electoral performance thresholds stipulated under Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), the Electoral Act, 2022, and relevant INEC regulations.
According to the NFFL, the affected parties consistently failed to satisfy constitutional requirements, including securing at least 25 per cent of votes in a presidential election in a state or winning at least one elective seat at the national, state or local government level.
The plaintiffs argued that the parties performed poorly in the 2023 general elections and subsequent by-elections, thereby failing to secure representation across the various tiers of government.
They maintained that the continued recognition of the parties by INEC was unlawful and detrimental to the integrity of Nigeria’s electoral system.
INEC, however, vigorously opposed the suit, insisting that the parties remained qualified for registration, having won seats in state assemblies and the National Assembly.
To support its position, the electoral body tendered certificates of return issued to candidates of the affected parties who had emerged victorious in previous elections.
