Appeal Court Restores ADC, APP, AA, AP, ZLP, Nullifies Deregistration Order Ahead Of 2027 Elections

From Victor Osula, Abuja

The Court of Appeal in Abuja has delivered a major legal victory to the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and four other political parties by setting aside the judgement of the Federal High Court that directed the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister them, a decision expected to reshape Nigeria’s political landscape ahead of the 2027 general elections.

In a unanimous judgement delivered on Tuesday by a three-member panel led by Justice Abba Mohammed, the appellate court declared that the June 15 decision of the Federal High Court was a nullity, holding that the lower court assumed jurisdiction over a suit that was fundamentally incompetent.

The appellate court ruled that the National Forum of Former Legislators (NFFL), which instituted the action seeking the deregistration of the political parties, was not a juristic person recognised by law and therefore lacked the legal capacity to commence the proceedings.

According to the court, since there was no valid suit before the Federal High Court, every consequential order made against the affected political parties, including the directive compelling INEC to withdraw their recognition, automatically collapsed.

The Court of Appeal consequently restored the legal status of the ADC, Action Peoples Party (APP), Action Alliance (AA), Accord Party (AP) and Zenith Labour Party (ZLP), while awarding costs against the NFFL.

In its lead judgment, the appellate court held that the Federal High Court failed to properly evaluate crucial evidence placed before it by the parties.

The justices observed that documentary evidence showing that the affected political parties had won elective offices in previous elections was ignored by the trial court before it reached its conclusion.

The panel further held that Justice Peter Lifu erred by proceeding to determine the substantive case despite a subsisting order of the Court of Appeal directing him to suspend proceedings pending the determination of pending appeals.

According to the court, the trial judge ought to have first obeyed the appellate court’s directive before taking any further step in the matter.

It ruled that the lower court should have dismissed the case for want of jurisdiction and for lacking merit instead of granting the sweeping reliefs sought by the plaintiffs.

Tuesday’s judgement reinforces the appellate court’s earlier intervention on June 16 when it stayed the execution of the Federal High Court judgement barely a day after it was delivered.

On that occasion, the Court of Appeal strongly criticised Justice Lifu for ignoring its earlier order issued on May 22 directing him to stay proceedings.

The appellate court described the action as “judicial impertinence,” stressing that judicial discipline requires lower courts to obey the decisions and directives of superior courts.

The justices further recalled the Supreme Court’s position that a judge who deliberately disregards a superior court’s order engages in conduct amounting to “judicial rascality” and undermines public confidence in the administration of justice.

The legal battle originated from Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/2026 filed by the National Forum of Former Legislators against INEC, the Attorney General of the Federation and five political parties.

The plaintiffs asked the Federal High Court to compel INEC to deregister the ADC, APP, AA, Accord Party and ZLP, arguing that they failed to satisfy the constitutional conditions required for continued registration.

They relied on Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), provisions of the Electoral Act 2022 and INEC’s regulations, contending that political parties that fail to attain prescribed electoral performance thresholds should automatically lose their registration.

According to the plaintiffs, the affected political parties failed to secure at least 25 per cent of votes in a state during presidential elections or win elective offices at the federal, state or local government levels.

The forum argued that the parties performed poorly during the 2023 general elections and subsequent by-elections and therefore no longer deserved recognition by INEC.

The plaintiffs maintained that allowing the parties to remain on the electoral register would weaken Nigeria’s electoral system and encourage the proliferation of inactive political parties.

The Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), supported the plaintiffs’ position before the trial court.

In court processes, the Attorney General argued that INEC had a constitutional obligation to deregister political parties that no longer met the minimum constitutional requirements and that failure to do so amounted to a breach of the Constitution.

Justice Peter Lifu accepted those arguments and ordered INEC to immediately deregister the five parties.

The trial court also restrained INEC from recognising the parties, accepting candidates nominated by them or permitting them to participate in the 2027 general elections. Additionally, the court ordered the parties to stop presenting themselves as duly registered political organisations.

However, dissatisfied with the judgment, INEC and all the affected political parties approached the Court of Appeal seeking to have the verdict set aside.

Reacting shortly after the judgement, the ADC described the ruling as a watershed moment for Nigeria’s constitutional democracy.

In a statement titled “2027: Court of Appeal Clears the Road for ADC,” the party commended the appellate justices for what it called their courage, independence and commitment to justice.

The party said the judgment reaffirmed the judiciary’s constitutional role as the final guardian of democratic governance and the rule of law.

According to the ADC, the appellate court correctly ruled that the June 15 judgment was a nullity because it was delivered in violation of an existing order of the Court of Appeal.

The party also welcomed the court’s finding that the plaintiffs lacked the locus standi to institute the suit and that their claims were speculative and legally unsustainable.

ADC further disclosed that the Court of Appeal clarified that Section 225A of the Constitution should be interpreted disjunctively rather than conjunctively, adding that because the electoral cycles in Osun and Ekiti states were still ongoing when the action was filed, the suit was premature.

The party equally noted that the appellate court criticised the trial court for disregarding INEC’s unchallenged affidavit evidence confirming that the ADC and the other affected political parties had complied with constitutional and statutory requirements.

According to the opposition party, the lower court had no legal justification for “manufacturing additional conditions” after accepting INEC’s evidence.

The ADC further said the latest judgment, combined with an earlier Federal High Court ruling affirming the Senator David Mark-led National Executive Committee, has finally removed every pending legal challenge to the party’s leadership and legal status.

It said the decisions effectively clear the party’s path to participate fully in the 2027 general elections.