The Court of Appeal’s intervention in the controversial deregistration of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and four other political parties yesterday handed the opposition a reprieve ahead of the 2027 general elections.

However, while the affected parties welcomed the intervention, opposition leaders and rights groups said the controversy has placed the judiciary under intense scrutiny and heightened concerns about the state of democratic competition ahead of 2027.

A three-member panel of the appellate court, led by Justice A. B. Mohammed, held that the judgment delivered by Justice Peter Odo Lifu of the Federal High Court, Abuja, could not be enforced because of an earlier order of the Court of Appeal staying further proceedings in the matter.

The decision followed an appeal filed by the affected political parties challenging Justice Lifu’s judgment directing the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister them.

Counsel to Accord Party, Musibau Adetunbi (SAN), told the appellate court that the trial judge delivered judgment on Monday despite being informed of the Court of Appeal’s May 22 order staying proceedings.

He argued that the action amounted to a disregard for the authority of the appellate court.

Adetunbi said he and counsel to the Action Peoples Party (APP) had drawn the attention of the trial judge to the appellate court’s order, but the court proceeded to deliver judgment.

However, counsel to the Incorporated Trustees of the National Forum of Former Legislators (NFFL), Yakubu Ruba (SAN), opposed the application by the political parties. He argued that his client was not served with the notice of appeal that led to the stay order.

Ruba urged the court to set aside the stay order, contending that it was issued without fair hearing and had become academic following the Federal High Court judgment.

The dispute arose from Justice Lifu’s judgment on Monday directing INEC to deregister ADC, Action Alliance (AA), Accord Party, Zenith Labour Party (ZLP) and APP for allegedly failing to meet constitutional requirements for political parties.

The judge also restrained INEC from recognising the parties, accepting nominations of their candidates or allowing them to participate in the 2027 general elections.

The suit, filed by the Incorporated Trustees of the NFFL, argued that the parties failed to satisfy the electoral performance requirements stipulated under Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution, including winning elective offices or meeting prescribed vote thresholds.

The judgment sparked concerns over the political future of ADC presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, and the use of Accord Party as a political platform by Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke ahead of future elections.

While INEC opposed the suit because the plaintiff lacked the legal standing to institute the action, the Attorney-General of the Federation supported the call for the deregistration of the parties.

The Court of Appeal subsequently adjourned the matter until June 25 for the hearing of the appeal.

FORMER Vice President and ADC presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, welcomed the decision of the Court of Appeal, but expressed concern over what he described as conflicting judicial decisions and politically charged rulings, saying the developments had placed the judiciary under intense public scrutiny.

According to him, recent events have shifted attention to the judiciary itself, echoing the position earlier expressed by ADC National Chairman, David Mark, that the institution is now under public examination.

Atiku warned against attempts to undermine Nigeria’s democratic system through what he termed judicial manipulation, describing such actions as a threat to the country’s democratic gains.

He said the judiciary still had an opportunity to strengthen public confidence by upholding the Constitution, the rule of law and the interests of the Nigerian people.

Judiciary on trial over ADC deregistration controversy, says David Mark
REACTING, the National Chairman of the African Democratic Congress, David Mark, said that the Nigerian judiciary, rather than the ADC, is currently on trial over the controversy surrounding the deregistration of the party and four others.

Speaking at the ADC Strategic Communications Retreat in Abuja, the former Senate President criticised the handling of matters relating to the party by Justice Peter Lifu, describing recent judicial actions as unprecedented.

According to Mark, contrary to public perception, the ADC is not the institution under scrutiny.

“The ADC is not on trial. Rather, it is the judiciary that is on trial, and the nation is waiting to see how the National Judicial Council (NJC) is going to handle this precarious situation,” he said.

He expressed concern over what he described as unusual judicial conduct, saying it was inconceivable that Justice Lifu, or any judge for that matter, would permit himself to be used for what he termed a “hatchet job”, even to the extent of disregarding an order of the Court of Appeal staying proceedings in the case.

Mark also faulted what he described as contradictory orders by Justice Lifu, alleging that the judge had directed the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to pronounce the ADC dead and, less than 24 hours later, put the same party on trial in the Nafiu Gombe case over which he presided.

The ADC chairman, however, urged party members not to be discouraged by the development, which he attributed to alleged machinations by the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC).

“We will go through all this turbulence because we are up to the task. By the time we are through all this, ADC will come out stronger,” he stated.

Mark also accused the administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu of attempting to distract the opposition, asserting that the APC-led government was “sinking”.

NUJ, MDR, MCE decry deregistration order, Ajulo defends court’s decision
MORE concerns trailed the Federal High Court judgment as the Nigerian Union of Journalists (NUJ), Movement for Democratic Renewal (MDR) and Movement for Credible Elections (MCE) warned that the development could destabilise the political landscape and undermine confidence in the 2027 general elections.

The groups, in separate reactions to The Guardian, described the decision as a dangerous intervention coming barely seven months before the general elections, arguing that it could fuel voter apathy, protests and political unrest.

Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court, Abuja, had ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister five political parties for allegedly failing to satisfy constitutional requirements under Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution.

The affected parties are the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Accord Party, Action Alliance (AA), Action Peoples Party (APP) and Zenith Labour Party (ZLP).

Reacting to the judgment, Co-Chairman of the Movement for Democratic Renewal (MDR) and Accord Party presidential candidate, Dr Gbenga Hashim, described the ruling as evidence of what he termed a systematic effort to weaken opposition politics and shrink Nigeria’s democratic space ahead of the 2027 elections.

Hashim said the development reinforced concerns he had repeatedly expressed since 2024 about alleged moves to narrow political competition and leave President Bola Tinubu as the dominant contender in the next presidential race.

According to him, recent political developments suggest a deliberate strategy aimed at weakening opposition parties and limiting alternatives available to Nigerians.

He alleged that opposition governors had come under pressure to defect to the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), while those unwilling to do so faced intimidation and political blackmail.

Hashim further claimed that after securing several defections, attention shifted to destabilising opposition parties through internal crises and leadership disputes.

According to him, the prolonged factional battles that have plagued some opposition parties in recent years were part of a broader effort to weaken alternative political platforms before the next elections.

He also accused INEC of operating an electoral timetable he claimed was inconsistent with provisions of the Electoral Act 2026, arguing that the commission had failed to comply with a court judgment challenging aspects of the schedule.

Describing the deregistration order as the most far-reaching step yet in what he called a broader plan to restrict political competition, Hashim said: “This is not only to destabilise the parties but to ensure they are unable to survive illegal INEC processes designed to make only Tinubu a viable candidate.”

Also reacting, NUJ National Secretary, Achike Chude, described the judgment as unprecedented, noting that he could not recall a similar decision being taken in the middle of an electoral cycle.

He expressed concern that the action was initiated by a third party rather than INEC itself.

According to Chude, the development could leave many Nigerians feeling politically stranded and may ultimately trigger voter apathy, protest votes or even civil unrest.

“The court ruling appears to have strengthened fears in some quarters that state institutions, including the courts and INEC, are being used to weaken opposition parties,” he said.

He urged the ruling APC to avoid actions capable of creating political instability and tension in the country.

For his part, Director-General of the Movement for Credible Elections (MCE), Wale Okunniyi, questioned the circumstances surrounding the suit that led to the judgment, including whether it was instituted before or after the wave of political defections witnessed over the past year.

He also queried whether the action originated from INEC or a private litigant.

Okunniyi argued that the affected parties ought not to have been deregistered if constitutional provisions were properly interpreted.

He warned that public confidence in the electoral process was already declining and that the judgment could further discourage participation in the 2027 electionss.

“The electorate are seriously losing confidence in the processes leading to the 2027 general elections. Many may refuse to vote, while others may resort to protests,” he said.

However, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Kayode Ajulo, defended the judgment, insisting that Justice Lifu merely applied existing constitutional provisions.

In a statement titled ‘Deregistration of ADC and Others: Why Justice Lifu’s Judgment is Constitutionalism in Its Purest Form’, Ajulo argued that attempts to blame President Tinubu for the ruling were misplaced.

“Since the judgment, fingers have been pointed in every direction and, as usual, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has become the preferred destination for political frustration. But beneath the fog of partisan emotions lies one inconvenient truth: Justice Lifu did not create the law; he merely interpreted and applied it,” he said.

Ajulo noted that Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution, upon which the judgment was anchored, was introduced through constitutional amendments signed into law in 2018 by former President Muhammadu Buhari.

“The legal framework relied upon by the court predates the Tinubu administration. It is a product of constitutional reform and belongs to the Nigerian state, not to any individual or government,” he added.

CHRICED cautions against party deregistration, warns of risks to democracy
ALSO, the Resource Centre for Human Rights and Civic Education (CHRICED) urged caution.

While acknowledging the constitutional authority of the judiciary to interpret electoral laws, CHRICED Executive Director, Ibrahim Zikirullahi, said the ruling raises concerns about a narrow interpretation of the Constitution without sufficient consideration of Nigeria’s broader democratic context.

He warned that such a consequential decision should go beyond technical compliance and reflect regional and international democratic norms that protect political participation, freedom of association and citizens’ right to political choice.

CHRICED expressed concern that the deregistration of political parties, particularly as Nigeria approaches another electoral cycle, could further shrink civic space and weaken political pluralism.

According to the organisation, democracy extends beyond periodic elections and includes the continuous protection of citizens’ rights to organise, associate and participate meaningfully in political life.

It stressed that any action that reduces the number of political alternatives available to voters risks undermining inclusiveness, accountability and public trust in democratic institutions.

The group also raised concerns about consistency in the application of electoral laws, noting that party deregistration processes in Nigeria have historically attracted criticism over selective enforcement and a lack of uniform standards.

Ameh warns party deregistration ruling threatens Nigeria’s democracy
FORMER National Chairman of the Inter-Party Advisory Council (IPAC), Peter Ameh, condemned the Federal High Court judgment, warning that the decision poses a serious threat to constitutional democracy, political freedom and the survival of Nigeria’s multiparty system.

Ameh said the ruling sets a dangerous legal and political precedent capable of shrinking Nigeria’s democratic space and undermining citizens’ constitutional right to freedom of association as guaranteed under Section 40 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

He argued that the right to belong to a political party, labour union or civic association is a fundamental freedom that should not be restricted by administrative convenience, procedural interpretation or judicial reasoning that appears inconsistent with established democratic principles.

According to him, political pluralism is a core strength of democratic governance, stressing that political parties exist not only to contest elections but also to serve as platforms for civic education, ideological expression, national debate and democratic accountability.

Ameh warned that attempts to limit political participation through legal or institutional mechanisms could destabilise the political system and create avoidable tension within Nigeria’s democratic environment.

He maintained that democracy thrives on inclusion, competition and the protection of diverse political voices, urging stakeholders to safeguard democratic freedoms and ensure broad participation in the political process.

Adebayo rejects party deregistration, vows support for affected parties
PRESIDENTIAL candidate of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), Prince Adewole Adebayo, defended Nigeria’s multiparty democracy, rejecting moves to deregister political parties and pledging to support efforts to overturn what he described as an assault on democratic freedoms.

Reacting to reports of a court-backed move to deregister several registered political parties, Adebayo warned that such actions threaten the foundations of constitutional democracy and risk narrowing the political space at a time when Nigerians need more choices, not fewer.

In a statement posted on his X account, the SDP presidential candidate said there was neither constitutional authority nor democratic justification for eliminating legitimate political platforms through judicial or administrative measures.

According to him, the timing of the development is particularly troubling, coming only days after Nigeria marked Democracy Day with declarations of commitment to democratic governance, inclusion and political freedom.

Adebayo noted that although the SDP is not among the parties affected by the proposed deregistration, remaining silent in the face of what he described as injustice would amount to a betrayal of democratic principles.

“An injury to one democratic platform is an injury to all. Democracy cannot flourish where political competition is restricted and citizens are denied meaningful alternatives,” he said.

He called on Nigerians, civil society groups, pro-democracy advocates and political stakeholders to resist any attempt to shrink the nation’s democratic space, insisting that political pluralism remains essential to national stability and development.