—Why court ordered INEC to deregister parties
—You’re playing with fire, ADC warns Tinubu’s govt
By Clifford Ndujihe, Dapo Akinrefon, Ikechukwu Nnochiri, Omeiza Ajayi & Luminous Jannamike
LAGOS — Leaders of African Democratic Congress, ADC; and Accord, yesterday picked holes in the ruling of a Federal High Court ordering the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, to de-register their parties and four other parties.
While ADC said the All Progressives Congress, APC-led Federal Government is playing with fire over alleged de-registration plot, its National Chairman, Senator David Mark, said the opposition party will be on the ballot in 2027, despite the verdict.
Also, Governor Ademola Adeleke of Osun State, the sole governor of Accord Party in the country said the judgment violated a Court of Appeal order.
This was as presidential candidate of African Action Congress, AAC, Omoyele Sowore, described the development as undemocratic and inconsistent with the principles of multi-party democracy.
Why court ordered INEC to deregister ADC, Accord, 3 others
The other parties the Abuja Federal High Court directed the electoral body to de-register are Action Peoples Party, APP; Action Alliance, AA; Accord; and Zenith Labour Party, ZLP.
The order followed a judgment delivered by Justice Peter Lifu.
According to the court, the five political parties failed to meet the constitutional requirements to warrant their continued existence and participation in future elections.
It barred INEC from further according recognition to the parties, accepting nominations of their candidates, or giving effect to their activities for the purpose of participating in the 2027 general elections.
Moreover, Justice Lifu ordered the defendants to stop parading themselves as registered political parties in the country, and held that there is merit in a suit filed against them by the National Forum of Former Legislators, NFFL.
The group, in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/2026, prayed the court to determine whether INEC has a constitutional obligation to remove political parties that fail to meet the 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.
It was the position of the plaintiff that the five political parties listed as defendants in the matter had persistently failed to meet the constitutional benchmarks required to retain their registration.
The former legislators stressed that the requirements include winning at least 25 per cent of votes in a state during a presidential election or securing at least one elective seat at the national, state, or local government level.
They told the court that the ADC and the four other parties performed poorly in both the 2023 general elections and by-elections conducted by INEC, thereby failing to win seats across key tiers of government.
The litigants insisted that the continued existence of the ADC and other defendants as recognised political parties is unlawful and undermines the integrity of the country’s electoral system.
Reliefs
Among other reliefs, the plaintiff urged the court to declare that INEC is duty-bound to deregister such parties.
It further urged the court to compel the Commission to de-register the five political parties before preparations for the 2027 elections advance further.
Beyond declaratory reliefs, the plaintiff prayed the court to restrain the five affected parties from participating in general elections or engaging in political activities such as campaigns, rallies, and primaries.
It also sought a court injunction restraining INEC from recognising or dealing with the parties in any official capacity unless and until they strictly comply with constitutional provisions.
AGF’s backing
Remarkably, the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, who is also a defendant in the matter, threw his weight behind the plaintiff.
In processes filed before the court, the AGF argued that the continued existence of the said political parties violated extant provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and ultimately undermined the nation’s electoral integrity.
According to him, unless the court intervenes, INEC will continue to act in breach of its constitutional duty by retaining parties that had failed to meet the minimum requirements prescribed by law.
The AGF, in an affidavit filed through a team of lawyers led by Prof. Joshua Olatoke, SAN, maintained that as the chief law officer of the federation, he was duty-bound to defend and uphold the constitution, including ensuring compliance with the Electoral Act and other laws governing elections in the country.
“The 1st Defendant has no residual discretion to retain the registration of political parties that have clearly failed to satisfy the minimum threshold prescribed under Section 225A of the Constitution.
“The continued existence of non-performing political parties will inflate the ballots, burden public funds, complicate election administration, and undermine the constitutional intention behind Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).
“Any failure or refusal of the 1st Defendant to deregister the 3rd to 7th Defendants as political parties constitutes a continuing breach of constitutional duty, capable of being challenged by way of public interest litigation.
“Unless this Honourable Court intervenes, the 1st Defendant (INEC) will continue to act in breach of its constitutional duty to deregister the 3rd to 7th Defendants — parties that have failed to meet the constitutional threshold — as the right to associate as a political party under the Constitution is not absolute,” the AGF added.
Consequently, he urged the court to grant all the reliefs contained in the suit, insisting that doing so would be in the interest of justice.
INEC, 5 parties oppose suit
However, INEC, through its lawyer, Mr. Haliru Mohammed, challenged the competence of the suit, which it urged the court to dismiss.
All five political parties equally opposed the suit, and some of them approached the Court of Appeal to challenge interlocutory orders Justice Lifu had made in favour of the plaintiff.
Appeal court order
Following an appeal lodged by Accord, a three-member panel of the Court of Appeal in Abuja, had on May 22, ordered the high court to suspend further proceedings in the case, pending the determination of the appeal before it.
The appellate court panel, led by Justice Muhammed Danjuma, fixed October 27 to hear the appeal.
However, in his judgment, yesterday, Justice Lifu disregarded the appellate court’s order, insisting it was an attempt by the defendants to forestall his verdict on the matter.
He also dismissed all the preliminary objections that queried the competence of the suit.
The judgment may affect the chances of candidates of the affected political parties, including former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and Governor Ademola Adeleke, to contest the 2027 presidential poll and the impending governorship election in Osun State.
While Atiku is the presidential flag bearer of the ADC, Adeleke is the candidate of Accord in August 15 Osun State governorship poll.
You’re playing with fire, ADC warns FG
In a response to the ruling, the ADC warned the Federal Government and the APC that they were ‘playing with fire’ by backing what it described as efforts to de-register the party through the courts, saying such a move could trigger a political crisis ahead of the 2027 general election.
The party said the issue had gone beyond its registration status and now raised broader questions about whether Nigerians would have a genuine opposition choice on the ballot in 2027. It argued that any attempt to remove the ADC from the electoral contest would amount to an attack on democracy and political pluralism.
The position was contained in a statement by the party’s National Publicity Secretary, Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi.
“We wish to warn, in the strongest possible terms, against any attempt to use the judiciary as an instrument to undermine democracy and plunge Nigeria into a major political crisis,” Abdullahi said.
Rejecting the judgment, the ADC maintained that only INEC had the constitutional authority to register or de-register political parties, noting that INEC had informed the court that there was no legal basis for its de-registration.
“The facts are straightforward. The plaintiffs had argued that the ADC and four other political parties failed to satisfy constitutional requirements relating to continued registration. However, in its counter-affidavit filed before the court in May, INEC categorically maintained that the ADC had not violated any registration requirements,” the party stated.
It also accused Justice Peter Lifu of proceeding with the matter, despite a subsisting Court of Appeal order directing a stay of proceedings and announced plans to petition the National Judicial Council, NJC, over what it described as the judge’s conduct.
Beyond the legal dispute, the ADC alleged that individuals linked to the Presidency had championed the case and questioned the involvement of the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice in the matter.
“Our position is anchored on the role that agents of the ruling party have played in this matter. It would be recalled that the case has been championed directly by individuals working with the President’s Chief of Staff,” the statement added.
The opposition party also questioned the timing of the judgment, saying, its “coming at a time the party has concluded its primaries and is fielding candidates for all positions in the next election, especially the presidential election, it is clear what this is all about.”
Warning of wider consequences, the ADC said “any attempt to eliminate the country’s major opposition party through judicial manoeuvring, thereby sabotaging the political aspirations of hundreds of its candidates, is a direct invitation to anarchy.”
ADC’ll be on ballot despite judgment — Mark
In like manner, National Chairman of the party, Senator David Mark, insisted that ADC would remain on the ballot for the 2027 general elections, describing the ruling as a temporary setback and expressed confidence that it would be overturned through the judicial process.
The assurance was contained in a statement by Kola Ologbondiyan, Special Adviser on Media and Publicity to the ADC National Chairman, after Mark received a delegation of the party’s candidates in Abuja.
“The ADC will be on the ballot in 2027. I assure all our candidates, members and supporters that this temporary setback will be overcome through the judicial process. We remain resolute and confident in the rule of law,” Mark said.
He questioned the validity of the judgment, noting that the Court of Appeal had earlier ordered a stay of proceedings in the matter and adjourned further hearing until October 27, 2027.
“The judgment cannot stand. It will be set aside because it does not pass the test of law and due process. Our democracy must be protected from actions that seek to undermine the constitutional rights of political parties and the choices available to Nigerians,” Mark stated.
He described the ruling delivered by Justice Lifu of the Federal High Court, Abuja, as a direct threat to Nigeria’s democratic system and the constitutional rights of political parties.
Atiku fingers Tinubu over plot against opposition
Presidential Candidate of the ADC, Atiku Abubakar, also condemned the judgment, describing it as a dangerous assault on constitutional democracy ahead of 2027.
In a statement by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, Atiku noted the ruling was delivered despite a subsisting Court of Appeal order of May 22, 2026, staying proceedings in the suit pending appeal.
“A stay of proceedings means precisely what it says. It freezes every further step, including delivery of judgment. This raises serious questions about respect for the hierarchy of courts and the rule of law,” he said.
He alleged the judgment fits a pattern of political persecution targeting opposition platforms.
“The Tinubu administration is singularly focused on eliminating major political opponents ahead of 2027, rather than confronting insecurity, economic hardship and unemployment. This is not governance. It is political elimination by other means,” he said.
Atiku urged ADC members and democrats not to be discouraged, vowing to pursue lawful avenues to defend the party and “preserve the multiparty system which remains the cornerstone of our constitutional order.”
Ruling violates Appeal Court order —Adeleke
On his part, Governor Adeleke described the judgment of the Federal High Court deregistering five political parties as an abuse of court process and direct violation of a subsisting order of the Court of Appeal for a stay of proceedings by the Federal High Court.
Adeleke, in a statement by his spokesperson, Mallam Olawale Rasheed, said: “It is on record before Justice Peter Lifu that in the record of proceedings of the Court of Appeal of May 22, 2026 and which was put before his Lordship as Exhibit MAC 2 the Court of Appeal specifically pronounced that “The delivery of the judgment is still part of the proceedings of the Court.
“The governor urges the people to be calm as the Court of Appeal is taking up the matter Tuesday(today), assuring the public that this “efforts to stop Osun people from exercising their voting rights will fail by the special grace of Almighty God. The rule of law and humanity shall prevail at the end of the day.
“I call on Osun people to remain calm and be assured that our rights will be affirmed and our party, the Accord, will be on the ballot on August 15. We will not only be on the ballot, we will win the forthcoming governorship election overwhelmingly. We should remain calm and forge ahead with mobilisation of our people.”
Sowore condemns court order
Presidential candidate of AAC, Omoyele Sowore, condemned the ruling and described the development as undemocratic and inconsistent with the principles of a multi-party democracy.
In a post on X, yesterday, the activist criticised the deregistration of political parties that had already concluded their primaries and were preparing for future elections.
“I totally condemn the deregistration of political parties that have already concluded their primaries and are preparing for general elections. Such an action is undemocratic and unjustifiable in a multi-party democracy, it shall not stand,” he wrote.
Our institutions must not be sacrificed on altar of politics – Obi
Similarly, presidential candidate of Nigeria Democratic Congress, NDC, Mr Peter Obi, decried the growing damage to the nation’s sacred institutions on the altar of politics.
Reacting to the Court ruling, Obi remarked that nations rise when institutions are stronger and not when politicised.
Writing on his X handle, the NDC presidential candidate said: “When the controversy surrounding the removal of the former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Walter Onnoghen, unfolded, I expressed a concern to a friend: that the greatest damage might not be immediate, but the message it sends about the sanctity and independence of our institutions to the world.
“Strong economies are built on trust. Investors can manage security risks, policy risks, and even market risks. What they fear most is uncertainty in the rule of law and a judiciary that is perceived to be vulnerable to political pressure.
“Today, many Nigerians have lost confidence in systems that should protect them. Businesses increasingly request that their contracts be governed by foreign jurisdictions because they have greater confidence in those institutions than in our own. That should concern every patriot.
“To our judges, legal luminaries, senior advocates, and lawyers: this is your moment. Rise, defend the rule of law, take back your country! A new Nigeria is possible.”
