By Ikechukwu Nnochiri
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has asked the Court of Appeal in Abuja to stay the execution of the judgment that ordered the deregistration of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and four other political parties.
The Commission also threw its weight behind a notice of appeal lodged by the political parties.
Addressing a three-member panel of the appellate court on Tuesday, the electoral body said it was shocked by the decision of Justice Peter 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, decried that it was not notified that the judgment would be delivered, saying it only heard about the court’s decision through media reports.
“My Lords, we are aware of an order that this court made on May 22, which stopped the 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 the 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 the execution of the judgment.”
Likewise, counsel to the 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 the judicial hierarchy.
“Sincerely, my Lords, 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 the attention of the appellate court panel to the fact that on June 20, INEC would conduct by-elections across six states of the federation.
They contended that if the judgment were 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.
The appellate court is still hearing submissions from the other parties in the matter.
It will be recalled that aside from the ADC, the other parties the high court directed INEC to deregister are the Action Peoples Party (APP), Action Alliance (AA), Accord Party (AP), and Zenith Labour Party (ZLP).
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 candidates from the affected parties, 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.
He held that there was 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 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 the other defendants as recognised political parties is unlawful and undermines the integrity of the country’s electoral system.
