Court of Appeal to Decide Fate of ADC, Accord Party Today in Deregistration Suit

ABUJA — The Court of Appeal, Abuja division, will today hear the substantive appeal challenging the deregistration of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) , Accord Party , and three other political parties, in a case that has exposed deep tensions within Nigeria’s judiciary and sparked fears of a slide toward a one-party state. The appellate court had earlier adjourned the hearing from June 25 to July 7 to enable all parties in the appeal to file and exchange their processes for a full-scale hearing, and at the proceedings of June 25, counsel for the Accord Party, Musibau Adetunbi, SAN , informed the three-member panel of justices, led by Justice Abubakar Mohammed , that the record of appeal and the final judgment of the Federal High Court had been obtained on Monday, June 22, and transmitted to the Court of Appeal as required by law. The senior lawyer subsequently applied for a short adjournment to enable him and other parties to file their briefs of argument and exchange same to pave the way for the hearing of the matter, and the application for adjournment was not opposed by all other parties, prompting the panel to adjourn the hearing of the appeal till today by 2 pm. Although Adetunbi applied for three days to file and exchange briefs of argument, Justice Mohammed noted that some of the justices would be out of Abuja next week for a special session and announced July 7 as the hearing date, setting the stage for what legal observers describe as a landmark judicial confrontation.

The legal battle began when Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court, Abuja, in a judgment, ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister the ADC, Accord Party, and three other political parties on the ground that they did not fulfill constitutional requirements in the previous election. The affected parties are the African Democratic Congress (ADC) , Accord Party (AP) , Action Alliance (AA) , Zenith Labour Party (ZLP) , and Action Peoples Party (APP) , all of which have fielded candidates in previous elections and maintain structures across various states. Justice Lifu held that the parties failed to meet the constitutional threshold of Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution , which empowers INEC to deregister political parties that fail to satisfy prescribed constitutional requirements, including securing at least 25 per cent of the votes in a state during a presidential election or winning at least one elective seat. He held that the parties failed to secure the required electoral performance in the last general elections in compliance with the provisions of the law, and the court also 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.

READ ALSO:

• Nigerian-Born Teen Among Two Found Guilty of Murder in Enfield Gang Shooting
• Police arrest 153 suspects, recover guns, drugs in Lagos Operation
• Dangote, marketers slash petrol depot prices amid FG pressure

Although INEC opposed the deregistration at the trial court, insisting that the parties met constitutional requirements and even provided evidence—including certificates of return issued to candidates elected on the platforms of the affected parties—Justice Lifu nonetheless ordered the electoral body to deregister the five parties, dismissing the commission’s arguments as unsubstantiated. The suit was instituted by the National Forum of Former Legislators (NFFL) , which argued that the parties performed poorly in the 2023 general elections and subsequent by-elections, failing to win seats across key tiers of government, and that their continued recognition as political parties was a waste of electoral resources and a distortion of the democratic process. The plaintiffs maintained that the parties failed 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, and the forum argued that the continued existence of the said parties as recognised political parties was unlawful and undermined the integrity of the country’s electoral system. The Attorney General of the Federation , Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, who was joined as a defendant, threw his weight behind the plaintiffs, arguing that the continued existence of the political parties violated extant provisions of the 1999 Constitution and that the electoral body had the legal duty to deregister non-performing parties to sanitise the political landscape.

In a unanimous ruling delivered on June 16, 2026, the three-member panel of the Court of Appeal ordered an immediate stay of execution of the Federal High Court judgment, preventing INEC from implementing the deregistration order pending the determination of the substantive appeal, a decision that effectively suspended the trial court’s judgment and restored the parties’ legal status. The appellate court not only suspended enforcement of the judgment but also strongly reprimanded Justice Lifu for proceeding to hear the matter and deliver judgment despite an earlier order of the Court of Appeal directing him to stay proceedings, describing his conduct as a direct affront to judicial hierarchy. Justice Mohammed, who led the panel, held that the appellate court has a duty to invoke its power to ensure that its order is obeyed, and he described the action of Justice Lifu as “judicial impunity” and “rascality,” adding that: “What the trial court did was a violation of judicial precedent and the Constitution” . The court held that Justice Lifu’s action was “the highest form of judicial impertinence,” stressing that the Supreme Court had previously held that a judge who acts in such manner “is unfit for the bench, as the conduct amounts to judicial rascality,” and that such behaviour undermines public confidence in the judiciary and the rule of law. The appellate court noted that an enrolled order of the court, signed by Deputy Registrar Josephine Ekperobe, had expressly directed Justice Lifu to stay further proceedings in the suit pending the determination of an appeal filed by the Accord Party, but despite this clear directive, Justice Lifu proceeded to deliver judgment, directing INEC to deregister the five parties and barring them from participating in any future elections, including the 2027 general polls.

READ ALSO:

• ICYMI: How to Apply for 2026 FRSC Recruitment Successfully
• Tinubu orders probe of Google, Meta, X, AI platforms over alleged exploitation of Nigerian news content
• Russian airstrike kills Nigerian medical student days before graduation in Ukraine

“Courts are enjoined to protect their integrity. This Court has supervisory authority over the trial court. The decision of the lower court to proceed with the judgment despite the express order of this court is a brazen violation of the hierarchy of the court and the 1999 Constitution” .

Interestingly, INEC itself supported the application for a stay of execution at the appellate court, a move that surprised many observers given the commission’s statutory role as the electoral regulatory body. Represented by a legal team led by Haliru Mohammed, INEC informed the appellate court that the commission was surprised by Justice Lifu’s decision to proceed with delivery of judgment despite the earlier order restraining the lower court, and according to the commission, it was never formally notified about delivery of the judgment and only became aware of the development through media reports. In a statement that underscored the commission’s discomfort with the trial judge’s conduct, INEC declared: “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 execution of the judgment” , effectively aligning itself with the political parties seeking to overturn the deregistration order.

The judgment carried significant political implications, as it affected candidates sponsored by the affected parties, including former Vice President Atiku Abubakar , presidential candidate of the ADC, and Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke , governorship candidate of Accord Party in the upcoming state election, both of whom would have been rendered ineligible to contest future elections if the deregistration had been enforced. Both political figures slammed the deregistration judgment, describing it as an attempt to weaken opposition politics and undermine democracy ahead of the 2027 general elections, with Atiku’s camp describing the ruling as a “judicial coup” against democracy. The ADC, in a statement by its National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, described the court ruling as a threat to democracy and warned against actions capable of destabilising Nigeria’s political system, arguing that the judgment contradicted constitutional provisions and electoral laws governing political parties and that it was an overreach by the judiciary into the affairs of political associations. The party also faulted the judgment, citing the subsisting Court of Appeal order directing a stay of proceedings, which the trial judge proceeded despite being aware of, and described the development as an embarrassment to the Nigerian judiciary and a dangerous precedent for the rule of law. Had the judgment been enforced immediately, thousands of aspirants would have lost their legal platforms ahead of the 2027 general elections, and the Court of Appeal’s intervention was widely seen as averting a potential constitutional and electoral crisis that would have disenfranchised millions of voters who identify with the affected parties.

Today, the Court of Appeal will hear the substantive appeals filed by the affected parties seeking to set aside the deregistration judgment, and all defendants, including INEC, have urged the appellate court to overturn the trial court’s verdict on the grounds that it was delivered in breach of judicial hierarchy and without proper consideration of the evidence presented by INEC. Legal observers note that the outcome of today’s hearing will determine whether the five political parties can continue to participate in future elections, including the 2027 general elections, and whether the judiciary can restore public confidence in its ability to enforce its own orders and maintain decorum among its judges. The case has become a test of the resilience of Nigeria’s democracy and the independence of its judiciary, and all eyes are on the Court of Appeal as it prepares to deliver a verdict that could reshape the country’s political landscape for years to come.

Court of Appeal to Decide Fate of ADC, Accord Party Today in Deregistration Suit