An Abuja Court of Appeal panel has set aside a Federal High Court ruling that directed the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister five political parties, reinstating their official status and condemning the lower court’s handling of the matter.
A three-member panel led by Justice Abba Mohammed unanimously ruled on Tuesday that the original 15 June judgment delivered by Justice Peter Lifu was invalid due to a total lack of jurisdiction. The appellate court found that the suit, which was initially brought before the court by the National Forum of Former Legislators, was filed by a non-juristic entity, rendering the entire proceeding incompetent.
The legal challenge originated under suit FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/2026, in which the plaintiff urged the court to enforce Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and the Electoral Act 2022.
The former lawmakers argued that the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Action Peoples Party (APP), Action Alliance (AA), Accord Party (AP), and Zenith Labour Party (ZLP) had failed to secure 25 per cent of votes in any state during presidential polls or win elective seats at national, state, or local levels in the 2023 elections and subsequent by-elections. Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), joined the suit as a defendant in support of the suit, contending that retaining poorly performing parties undermined national electoral integrity.
Granting the plaintiff’s prayers, Justice Lifu had previously ordered INEC to deregister all five parties, barring the commission from accepting their candidates or recognising their activities ahead of the 2027 general elections.
However, in setting aside the judgment, the Court of Appeal noted that the trial court failed to evaluate key evidence proving that the affected parties had, in fact, won various elective seats in previous polls. Furthermore, the panel faulted Justice Lifu for proceeding to deliver judgment despite a 22 May order instructing him to stay proceedings pending an interlocutory appeal—a directive the appellate court had reinforced on 16 June by staying the execution of the lower court’s order.
Characterising the trial judge’s refusal to halt proceedings as “a form of judicial impertinence,” the panel referenced Supreme Court precedent warning that a judge acting in this manner “is unfit for the bench, as the conduct amounts to judicial rascality.”
Concluding that the substantive suit ought to have been dismissed for lack of merit and jurisdiction, the Court of Appeal allowed the separate appeals brought by the political parties and INEC. The appellate court confirmed that the ADC, APP, AA, Accord Party, and ZLP remain duly registered, and ordered the National Forum of Former Legislators to pay legal costs.