By Ademu Idakwo, Olakunle Olasanmi, Paul Uwaduma, Abuja
Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court yesterday ordered the deregistration of five political parties, sparking a wave of reactions from the affected political parties, candidates and their allies.
The parties affected by the court judgment are the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Action People’s Party (APP), Action Alliance (AA), Zenith Labour Party (ZLP) and Accord Party (AP).
With the judgment, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, the presidential candidate of the ADC, and his counterpart in the Accord Party, Gbenga Olawepo-Hashim, may not be fielded for the 2027 presidential election.
Also, Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke, billed to re-contest the August 15 governorship election on the platform of the Accord Party, appears to have been kicked out of the race by the judgment.
The court said the parties did not meet the constitutional threshold of Section 225 of the 1999 Constitution.
Section 225 of the 1999 Constitution gives the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) the power to deregister parties that fail to meet the constitutional threshold.
The court ordered INEC to immediately deregister the parties and bar them from participating in the 2027 general elections.
Shortly after the judgment was delivered, senior lawyers advised aggrieved parties to immediately appeal the judgment.
According to them, the judgment may not survive when it gets to the Court of Appeal.
Justice Lifu issued the order yesterday while delivering judgment in a suit filed by a group of former lawmakers in the country.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/2026, was instituted by the Incorporated Trustees of the National Forum of Former Legislators against INEC and the five political parties: African Democratic Congress (ADC), Action People’s Party (APP), Accord Party (AP), Zenith Labour Party (ZLP) and Action Alliance Party (AAP).
In the judgment, Justice Lifu barred INEC from further recognising 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.
In the same vein, the judge directed the parties to stop parading themselves as registered political parties in the country.
Adeleke, ADC, Mark, Atiku, Obi, Sowore React
The judgment sparked a barrage of reactions from the affected parties and their allies.
In a swift reaction, the ADC condemned the judgment, describing it as a threat to democracy and political stability.
The party also warned of the dire consequences that may follow any effort to remove the party from the ballot.
The National Publicity Secretary of ADC, Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, in a statement, said the “curious” judgment is the clearest evidence yet of the ruling party and government’s desperation to ensure that President Tinubu holds on to “power by any means necessary, even if it means subverting democracy and throwing the country into a crisis of immense proportions.”
The party spokesman said while the Constitution grants only INEC the power to register or deregister a political party, the court judgment has “flagrantly contradicted INEC’s position on affidavit and ignored a subsisting order of stay of proceedings of the Court of Appeal.”
The ADC therefore vowed to challenge the ruling through all lawful means, while urging its members to remain calm and await further directives.
“The ADC considers this development not merely a legal dispute, but a dangerous escalation capable of destabilising the nation’s democratic process,” the party warned.
Calling out those it described as agents of the ruling party over the judgment, the ADC recalled that the case has been championed directly by individuals working with the President’s Chief of Staff, adding that the decision of the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, who is a second defendant in the matter, to join the matter as a plaintiff in April was an absurdity which sent a signal that was impossible to ignore.
“However, the ADC would like to warn that 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.”
The ADC said it will petition the National Judicial Council (NJC) over the judicial rascality demonstrated by the presiding judge of the Federal High Court, whose conduct has continued to bring the institution of the judiciary into disrepute.
Earlier, the ADC National Chairman, Senator David Mark, urged members, supporters and candidates of the party not to lose hope over the judgment.
In a statement issued by his Special Adviser on Media and Publicity, Kola Ologbondiyan, after Mark received a delegation of ADC candidates in Abuja, the former Senate President described the judgment delivered by Justice Peter Lifu as “an arrow fired at the heart of Nigeria’s democracy” and insisted that the decision would not stand.
According to him, the party remains confident that the ruling would be overturned through the judicial process.
“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 said.
On its part, Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke faulted the ruling, describing it as an abuse of court process and a direct violation of a subsisting order of the Court of Appeal.
In a statement by his spokesperson, Mallam Olawale Rasheed, Adeleke maintained that the appellate court had already issued a stay of proceedings in the matter, making the lower court’s decision questionable.
“It is on record before Justice Peter Lifu that in the record of proceedings of the Court of Appeal of May 22, 2026, which was placed before the court as Exhibit MAC 2, the Court of Appeal specifically pronounced that the delivery of judgment is still part of the proceedings of the court,” the statement said.
The governor urged supporters of the Accord Party to remain calm, expressing confidence that the appellate court would resolve the dispute in favour of the party.
“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 overwhelmingly. Our lawyers are taking all the necessary steps to right the wrong,” Adeleke said.
Atiku also condemned the judgment, describing it as a deliberate attempt by President Tinubu’s administration to weaken the opposition and establish a one-party state.
He also said it was a dangerous assault on constitutional democracy and further evidence of a coordinated effort to eliminate political opposition ahead of the 2027 general elections.
The former Vice President, in a statement by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, yesterday said the ruling should alarm every Nigerian who believes in democracy, political pluralism and the rule of law.
He noted that the judgment was particularly troubling because it was delivered in the face of a subsisting order of the Court of Appeal which had expressly stayed further proceedings in the matter pending the determination of an appeal.
“The judgment represents a dangerous escalation of authoritarian tactics and a blatant assault on Nigeria’s democracy,” he said.
Also, presidential candidate of the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC), Peter Obi, said the judgment reflects growing damage to the nation’s sacred institutions on the altar of politics.
Obi, on his X handle, said: “The Federal High Court judgment ordering the deregistration of the ADC and other political parties is just one of those activities that further reduces the common man’s trust in our legal systems; it should be reversed.
“I pledge that we will restore the dignity, independence and integrity of the judiciary. The common man must have a voice. The business community must be protected from legal uncertainty and intimidation. Justice must be impartial, accessible and respected by all.”
“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,” he said.
Also reacting, African Action Congress (AAC) presidential candidate and activist, Omoyele Sowore, condemned the ruling, describing it as undemocratic and inconsistent with the principles of a multi-party democracy.
In a post on social media, Sowore argued that political parties which had already conducted primaries and were preparing for elections should not be removed from the political space through judicial pronouncements.
“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,” he wrote.
Similarly, the national leadership of the Accord Party rejected the judgment, describing it as a “travesty of justice” and a violation of due process.
The party’s National Chairman, Barrister Maxwell Mgbudem, in a statement said the court delivered its judgment despite a subsisting order from the Court of Appeal staying proceedings on the matter.
According to the party, the judgment was delivered in “flagrant disregard” of the appellate court’s directive, raising concerns about adherence to the rule of law and judicial procedure.
“It is curious that the Federal High Court would proceed to deliver judgment on a matter before the appellate court that had granted a stay of proceedings, aware that the delivery of the judgment was part of the proceedings of the court,” the statement said.
Accord maintained that the ruling would not stand and disclosed that its legal team had already commenced steps to challenge the judgment and seek its reversal.
APP Insists It Remains a Recognised Political Party
The National Leader of APP, Hon. Ikenga Ugochinyere, said the party remains a legally recognised political party and is not affected by the recent judgment delivered by Justice Peter Lifu ordering the deregistration of five political parties.
Ugochinyere, who chairs the House of Representatives Committee on Petroleum Resources (Downstream), while reacting to the decision, maintained that the court ruling has been overtaken by existing judgments of superior courts which affirmed the party’s legal status and continued existence.
According to him, available court records show that the APP’s registration and legal standing have been upheld in a series of judgments delivered by the Federal High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.
He noted that at least three separate Federal High Court judgments found that the APP met all constitutional and statutory requirements for registration as a political party, adding that those decisions were subsequently affirmed by the Court of Appeal and reinforced by the Supreme Court.
Lawyers React
Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Mr Abdul Balogun, advised the parties to weigh their options and possibly settle for an appeal.
According to him, the judgment may not succeed if it gets to the Court of Appeal.
“There is still a way out for the parties if they feel dissatisfied with the decision of the court.
“The Court of Appeal should be the next place I expect them to go immediately. The judgment can’t survive when it gets to a higher court,” he said.
Barrister Paul Omoh Aku warned against creating unnecessary controversy in the country’s political atmosphere.
He equally advised the affected parties to remain calm and explore the option of an appeal.
“I know accusing fingers will be pointed at the ruling party, the All Progressives Congress (APC), but that will not stop the court from doing what is right at the end of the day. The parties should immediately proceed on appeal and get the judgment set aside,” he said.
Professor of Law, Saleh U. Abbah, said the High Court that delivered the judgment is not the final court and INEC cannot close its door against the parties based on this judgment until a higher court decides on the matter one way or the other.
He said the parties still have a right of appeal and advised them to explore it.
“INEC cannot close its door on these parties until a higher court decides this matter one way or the other.
“The judgment should be tested at the Court of Appeal to deepen our jurisprudence,” he said.
The Case
A civil society group, the Incorporated Trustees of the National Forum of Former Legislators (NFFL), had dragged the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) before the court, praying for an order compelling it to deregister the five parties and prohibit them from participating in political activities in the country.
The group predicated its opposition to the existence of the parties on alleged violations of the 1999 Constitution’s provisions guiding party registration, recognition and existence.
Incidentally, the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, though a defendant in the suit, supported those seeking the deregistration of the parties.
He had engaged a Professor of Law and Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Joshua Olukayode Olatoke, who, during the hearing of the suit, canvassed the prohibition of the parties from existence.
INEC had, however, countered the suit in its defence, describing the plaintiff as a busybody that lacked locus standi (legal right) to file the suit and asked the court to dismiss it for being unmeritorious.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/25, was targeted against INEC and the AGF as the two defendants, but by extension, the five political parties.
The originating summons was brought pursuant to Section 225(A) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), Section 75(4) of the Electoral Act 2022, and applicable provisions of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019.
At the heart of the reliefs sought is whether INEC is constitutionally bound to deregister political parties that failed to meet the minimum electoral performance thresholds prescribed by law.
These include securing at least 25 per cent of votes cast in one state in a presidential election, winning a local government area in a governorship election, or clinching at least one seat in elections ranging from councillorship to the National Assembly.
The plaintiff asked the court to determine whether INEC is empowered, or indeed obligated, to enforce the thresholds against the affected parties, which allegedly failed to win any ward, legislative seat or elective office in previous elections.
Other issues they prayed the court to determine included whether the affected parties are still eligible to be recognised as legally registered political parties, and whether INEC can lawfully acknowledge or give effect to their political activities, such as congresses, primaries, campaigns and participation in the 2027 general elections, without strict compliance with Section 225(A) of the Constitution.
Among the reliefs sought are declaratory orders affirming that INEC is duty-bound to enforce constitutional benchmarks as a precondition for party registration and participation in elections, as well as orders compelling the electoral body to deregister the affected parties.
The plaintiff also sought mandatory and perpetual orders of injunction restraining INEC from recognising, accepting or giving effect to any political activities or correspondence from the parties unless and until they fully comply with constitutional and statutory requirements.
In an affidavit in support of the originating summons deposed to by Hon. Igbokwe Raphael Nnanna, Chairman of the Board of Trustees and National Coordinator of the NFFL, the group accused INEC of neglecting its constitutional duty by continuing to recognise political parties that have failed to meet the minimum performance thresholds prescribed by the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
According to the affidavit, the affected parties have, since their registration, failed to win a single elective seat at any level of government, including presidential, governorship, National Assembly, state assembly, chairmanship or council elections.
The plaintiff further claimed that the parties did not secure the constitutionally required 25 per cent of votes in at least one state in presidential elections, nor any representation across the country’s 8,809 wards, 774 local government areas, 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory.
Hon. Nnanna averred that despite these “total electoral failures”, INEC has continued to accord the parties full recognition, an action the group described as unconstitutional and contrary to the Electoral Act 2022 and INEC’s Regulations and Guidelines for Political Parties 2022.
The plaintiff warned that unless restrained by the court, INEC may unlawfully permit the affected parties to participate in the 2027 general elections, thereby “clogging the ballot papers, overstretching administrative resources and misleading voters”.
The former lawmakers argued that the continued existence of non-performing parties undermines political sanity, electoral integrity and genuine competition, while also resulting in the wastage of public funds.
Describing the action as a public interest suit, the NFFL urged the court to compel INEC to enforce constitutional compliance by deregistering political parties that have failed to meet the stipulated thresholds in order to deepen democracy and uphold the rule of law ahead of future elections.
Yakubu Abdullahi Ruba, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), supported by Barrister Gbenga Makanjuola, argued for the former lawmakers during proceedings, asking that the five political parties be proscribed out of existence.
However, Musibau Adetunmibi, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), and Shuaib Eneojo Aruwa, SAN, argued for the Accord Party and African Democratic Congress respectively, urging the court to dismiss the plaintiff’s suit for being frivolous, baseless and unwarranted.
Meanwhile, a Federal High Court sitting in Owerri, Imo State, has dismissed a suit challenging the legal status of the APP, ruling that the political party was never deregistered by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and remains a duly recognised political party under Nigerian law.
In a judgment that could have significant implications for the country’s electoral landscape, Justice I.N. Oweibo rejected all the reliefs sought by the plaintiff, who had asked the court to compel INEC to remove APP from its register of political parties on the grounds that it was allegedly deregistered during the commission’s 2020 exercise that affected 74 political parties.
The plaintiff had argued that APP’s participation in electoral activities, including the 2024 Rivers State Local Government Elections and local council polls in Jigawa State, was unlawful because the party had purportedly ceased to exist following the February 6, 2020, deregistration exercise.
To support the claim, the plaintiff relied on media reports and a Supreme Court judgment affirming INEC’s powers to deregister political parties that failed to meet constitutional requirements.
However, the court found that the plaintiff failed to establish that APP was ever lawfully deregistered.
