Adeleke, Atiku Hail Appeal Court Ruling Reversing ADC, Others’ Deregistration

By Ademu Idakwo, Paul Uwadinma, Olakunle Olasanmi, Abuja

The African Democratic Congress (ADC), Accord Party, Action Peoples Party (APP), Action Alliance (AA) and Zenith Labour Party (ZLP) have secured a major legal victory ahead of the 2027 general elections, following a unanimous judgement of the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, which set aside the Federal High Court ruling ordering their deregistration.

The appellate court, in a judgement delivered by a three-member panel presided over by Justice Abba Mohammed, declared the Federal High Court judgement a nullity, holding that the lower court lacked the judicial power to entertain the suit and had proceeded to deliver judgement despite an existing order of the Court of Appeal directing a stay of proceedings.

The judgement has sparked reactions from the affected parties, their leaders and the Inter-Party Advisory Council (IPAC), with stakeholders hailing it as a victory for constitutional democracy, multiparty democracy and the rule of law.

The five parties had challenged the Federal High Court judgement delivered by Justice Peter Lifu, which ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister them over alleged failure to meet constitutional requirements following the 2023 general elections.

The Court of Appeal faulted the lower court for proceeding to deliver judgement despite an existing order of the appellate court directing a stay of proceedings, including the delivery of judgement.

The appellate court described the action of the trial court as amounting to “judicial impertinence”, or what the Supreme Court has described as “judicial insubordination.”

The court further held that the first respondent lacked the requisite locus  to institute the action and found that the evidence before it clearly established compliance with Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.

The appellate court consequently set aside the judgement of the Federal High Court, which had ordered INEC to deregister the five parties over alleged failure to meet constitutional requirements.

The case was instituted by the National Forum of Former Legislators (NFFL), which sought a determination of whether INEC had a constitutional obligation to deregister political parties that failed to meet the electoral performance thresholds under Section 225A of the Constitution, as reinforced by the Electoral Act and INEC regulations.

The plaintiffs argued that the five political parties failed to meet the constitutional benchmarks required for continued registration after the 2023 general elections and subsequent by-elections.

They contended that the parties had failed to secure the required percentage of votes or win elective seats at the relevant levels of government.

The Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, who was also a defendant in the suit, supported the plaintiffs, arguing that the continued existence of the affected parties violated relevant constitutional provisions.

However, the defendants, including INEC, challenged the Federal High Court judgement and urged the Court of Appeal to set it aside.

The ADC, in a statement signed by its national publicity secretary, Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, welcomed the unanimous judgement, saying it vindicated the party’s long-standing position that the deregistration case was fundamentally flawed in law and unsupported by credible evidence.

The party said it particularly noted the Court of Appeal’s findings concerning the conduct of the trial judge, Justice Peter Lifu, including the appellate court’s finding that he had concocted evidence in favour of the plaintiff.

The ADC also cited the appellate court’s criticism of the trial judge for his alleged disobedience of the superior court’s directives, describing the conduct as judicial indiscipline, impertinence and insubordination.

The party said the Court of Appeal upheld its contention that the plaintiffs lacked the requisite locus standi to institute the action, having failed to demonstrate any legal interest peculiar to themselves.

According to the ADC, the plaintiffs had relied on claims that they had previously contested elections and might do so again in future, which the appellate court found insufficient to invoke its jurisdiction.

The party said the appellate court further held that the plaintiffs failed to establish their claims with credible evidence, while reaffirming that INEC, as the constitutional regulator of political parties, had presented unchallenged evidence confirming that the ADC satisfied the constitutional and electoral requirements for its continued existence.

The ADC also welcomed the Court of Appeal’s reversal of the Federal High Court’s findings concerning elected members of the party.

It recalled that affidavit evidence showed that the ADC had returned elected representatives, including three members from Kogi State, but that the trial court concluded that the representatives had defected to another political party despite the absence of evidence of such defection before it.

On Section 225A of the Constitution, the ADC said the Court of Appeal identified contradictions in the trial court’s interpretation and found that the lower court had arrived at conclusions inconsistent with both the Constitution and the evidence before it.

The party noted that the appellate court consequently concluded that the ADC satisfied the constitutional threshold for recognition as a political party and remained entitled to continue its political activities under the Constitution and the Electoral Act.

Mark, Atiku, Adeleke hail judgement

Reacting to the judgement, ADC national chairman, Senator David Mark, described the verdict as “a triumph for democracy and the rule of law.”

In a statement issued by his special adviser on media and publicity, Kola Ologbondiyan, Mark said the judgement was a victory not only for the party but also for Nigeria’s constitutionalism and the rule of law.

Mark said the judgement had restored confidence in the judiciary and reaffirmed the courts as the last hope of the common man and a dependable guardian of democratic values.

“The verdict is a reassuring reminder that our judiciary can still rise above pressure and protect democracy, political pluralism and the constitutional rights of citizens and political parties,” he said.

He described the attempt to deregister the ADC as a direct assault on multiparty democracy and an effort to undermine Nigerians’ right to associate and participate freely in the political process.

Mark urged ADC candidates, members and supporters to remain resolute and united as they intensify grassroots mobilisation ahead of the 2027 general elections.

“Our attention now returns fully to building a stronger, more united and people-oriented political platform that will offer Nigerians a credible alternative in 2027. We must remain steadfast, disciplined and committed to the task ahead,” he said.

Also reacting to the development, former vice president and ADC presidential candidate for the 2027 election, Atiku Abubakar, welcomed the judgement, describing it as an affirmation of the supremacy of the rule of law.

In a statement issued by his media office on Tuesday, Atiku congratulated the justices of the Court of Appeal for their courage, fidelity to the Constitution and commitment to justice.

He said the appellate court’s judgement, alongside an earlier judgement of the Federal High Court, Abuja Division, which upheld the election of the Senator David Mark-led National Executive Committee of the ADC, had cleared the legal obstacles to the party’s participation in the 2027 general election.

Atiku said the Court of Appeal rightly held that the judgement delivered by Justice Lifu was a nullity, having been rendered in disobedience to a subsisting order of the appellate court.

He warned against using the courts and other state institutions as instruments of political control, stressing that political contests should be decided by the votes of Nigerians rather than litigation.

“As the nation moves steadily towards the 2027 general election, political contests must be decided by the votes of Nigerians—not by contrived lawsuits designed to secure in the courtroom what cannot be achieved through the ballot,” Atiku said.

Meanwhile, Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke, who is the Accord Party’s governorship candidate for the 15 August 2026 election, also hailed the appellate court judgement.

Adeleke said the ruling had reaffirmed the legal status of the Accord Party ahead of the governorship election and urged its members and supporters to intensify grassroots mobilisation.

He congratulated members and supporters of the party, saying the judgement had affirmed what the party had consistently maintained about its legal status.

“Again, Accord is victorious; democracy and the rule of law have prevailed,” Adeleke said.

Adeleke urged party leaders, youths, women and supporters to put the legal dispute behind them and concentrate on the election while mobilising voters across wards and polling units.

Ruling Victory for Rule of Law – IPAC

The Inter-Party Advisory Council (IPAC) also commended the Court of Appeal for overturning the Federal High Court judgement, describing the ruling as a major victory for constitutional democracy and the rule of law.

In a statement issued by its national publicity secretary, Comrade Egbeola Wale Martins, IPAC said the judgement reaffirmed Nigeria’s commitment to constitutional governance, freedom of association and the preservation of the country’s democratic system.

The council said the appellate court’s decision had restored public confidence in the judiciary as the last hope of the common man and demonstrated that Nigerians’ constitutional rights to political participation remained protected.

“The appellate court’s decision is a courageous reaffirmation of constitutional democracy, the rule of law and the sanctity of Nigeria’s multi-party democratic system,” IPAC said.

It praised the Court of Appeal justices for what it described as a courageous and well-reasoned judgement, saying the decision underscored the vital role of appellate courts in protecting democratic institutions and correcting lower courts’ decisions that could undermine constitutional governance.

The council renewed its call on the National Judicial Council (NJC) to intensify efforts to sanitise the judiciary by investigating judicial decisions that are manifestly inconsistent with constitutional provisions.

IPAC argued that identifying and appropriately addressing judicial officers whose judgements generate constitutional crises or unnecessary political tensions would strengthen public confidence in the justice system, reduce avoidable litigation and prevent future disputes capable of destabilising democracy.