The appeal arises from a controversial judgment delivered by Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja, pwhich directed the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister five political Parties
KaNo—
The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja on Thursday adjourned the hearing of an appeal challenging the deregistration of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Accord Party, and three other political parties until July 7, 2026.
The appellate court shifted the matter from its earlier scheduled date of June 25 to allow parties in the suit sufficient time to file and exchange their briefs of argument ahead of the substantive hearing.
At the resumed proceedings, counsel to the Accord Party, Musibau Adetunbi (SAN), informed the three-member panel led by Justice Abubakar Mohammed that the record of appeal and the judgment of the Federal High Court had only been obtained on Monday.
He added that the documents had since been transmitted to the appellate court.
Adetunbi subsequently sought a short adjournment to enable all parties to file and exchange the necessary legal processes.
The application was not opposed by other parties involved in the suit, prompting the court to grant the request.
While the senior advocate requested three days to complete the filing and exchange of briefs, Justice Mohammed explained that some members of the panel would be unavailable due to official engagements outside Abuja.
He stated that July 7 was the earliest convenient date for the continuation of proceedings and adjourned the matter to 2:00 p.m. on that day.
The appeal arises from a controversial judgment delivered by Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja, which directed the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister five political parties.
In his ruling, Justice Lifu held that the parties failed to meet the constitutional requirements necessary to retain their registration and participate in future elections.
He relied on provisions of Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and relevant sections of the Electoral Act, 2022, which outline performance benchmarks for political parties.
Under the law, political parties are required to meet certain electoral thresholds, such as securing at least 25 per cent of votes in a state during presidential elections or winning at least one elective position in national or state elections.
However, INEC opposed the deregistration order, maintaining that the affected parties had met the constitutional criteria.
The commission argued that several candidates elected on the platforms of these parties had won seats in previous elections, thereby satisfying the requirements for continued registration.
To support its position, INEC tendered certificates of return issued to candidates who emerged victorious in various elections across the country under the platforms of the parties in question.
In a related development, the Court of Appeal had, on June 16, granted a stay of execution of the Federal High Court judgment, effectively preventing INEC from enforcing the deregistration pending the determination of the appeal.
In a unanimous ruling at the time, the appellate court criticised Justice Lifu for delivering the judgment despite an earlier directive ordering him to suspend proceedings in the case.
The court described the action as a violation of the hierarchy of courts and emphasized the importance of judicial discipline.
The court’s decision to stay the execution of the judgment provided temporary relief to the affected political parties, allowing them to continue operating pending the outcome of the appeal.
The suit leading to the Federal High Court judgment was instituted by the National Forum of Former Legislators.
Specifically, the forum contended that the parties did not achieve the required electoral success in the 2023 general elections and subsequent by-elections, and therefore should be deregistered in line with the law.
ADC Rejects Court Ruling Seeking De-Registration Of Parties
However, the African Democratic Congress has strongly rejected the ruling, describing it as an attempt to undermine Nigeria’s democratic process through judicial means.
In a statement posted on its official X (formerly Twitter) handle and signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, the party condemned the judgment as unconstitutional and deeply troubling.
“The African Democratic Congress (ADC) wishes 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,” the statement read.
The party further expressed alarm over the judgment delivered by Justice Lifu, arguing that it contradicts established constitutional principles and known judicial procedures.
According to the ADC, the decision conflicts with positions previously advanced by INEC on the issue of political party deregistration.
The party maintained that the electoral commission had explicitly defended its status before the court, affirming that it remained compliant with all constitutional and statutory requirements.
Quoting INEC’s position during the proceedings, the party stressed that political parties can only be deregistered on legally recognised grounds.
It added that such decisions must not be influenced by political considerations, public sentiment, or pressure from vested interests.
Beyond the substance of the ruling, the ADC also raised concerns about the procedure that led to the judgment.
The party alleged that the Federal High Court proceeded with the matter despite an existing order of the Court of Appeal issued on May 22, 2026, directing that proceedings be stayed.
The ADC described this development as a breach of judicial protocol and a disregard for the established hierarchy of courts, warning that such actions could erode public confidence in the judiciary.
Legal analysts say the case raises critical questions about the interpretation and application of constitutional provisions governing political party registration and deregistration in Nigeria.
They also note that the outcome of the appeal could have far-reaching implications for the country’s multi-party democracy.
As the July 7 hearing date approaches, attention will be focused on the Court of Appeal’s interpretation of the law and its determination of whether the affected parties meet the constitutional requirements for continued existence.
