The Court of Appeal in Abuja has set aside a Federal High Court judgment that directed the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and four other political parties.

In a unanimous decision by a three-member panel, the appellate court held that the June 15 order issued by the high court was a nullity. It ruled that the trial court wrongly assumed jurisdiction over an incompetent suit filed by a non-juristic entity and that no valid case existed to justify the consequential order compelling INEC to withdraw recognition of the parties.

The panel, in a lead judgment delivered by Justice Abba Mohammed, found that the high court failed to properly evaluate evidence before it, including proof that the parties had won seats in previous elections. It also held that the trial judge acted in defiance of an earlier appellate order staying proceedings in the matter. The high court, the justices said, ought to have dismissed the case for want of both jurisdiction and merit.

As a result, the Court of Appeal restored the registration of the affected parties and declared that they remain duly registered. It allowed the separate appeals filed by the parties and awarded costs against the National Forum of Former Legislators (NFFL), the body that initiated the suit.

The parties whose registration was restored are the ADC, Action Peoples Party (APP), Action Alliance (AA), Accord Party (AP) and Zenith Labour Party (ZLP).

On June 16, the appellate court had already ordered a stay of execution of the high court judgment and criticised the trial judge for disregarding judicial hierarchy. The panel berated Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja for disobeying its May 22 order directing him to stay proceedings pending the outcome of the parties’ appeals. Despite being notified of the stay order, Justice Lifu proceeded to deliver judgment. The Court of Appeal described his action as “a form of judicial impertinence,” recalling Supreme Court authority that a judge who conducts himself in that manner “is unfit for the bench, as the conduct amounts to judicial rascality.”

The high court had earlier directed INEC to deregister the five parties for allegedly failing to meet constitutional requirements for continued existence and participation in future elections. It barred the commission from recognising the parties, accepting their candidate nominations or giving effect to their activities for the 2027 general elections. Justice Lifu also ordered the parties to stop presenting themselves as registered political parties, finding merit in the NFFL’s suit.

In the originating action marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/2026, the NFFL asked the court to determine whether INEC has a constitutional duty to remove parties that fail to satisfy the electoral performance thresholds in Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), reinforced by the Electoral Act 2022 and INEC regulations. The plaintiffs argued that the five parties had persistently failed to meet the benchmarks, which include winning at least 25 per cent of votes in a state during a presidential election or securing at least one elective seat at national, state or local government level. They cited the parties’ poor performance in the 2023 general elections and subsequent by-elections, insisting that their continued recognition was unlawful and undermined the integrity of the electoral system.

The Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, who was also a defendant, supported the plaintiffs. He argued that the continued existence of the parties violated constitutional provisions and compromised electoral integrity, and that without court intervention INEC would remain in breach of its duty by retaining non-compliant parties.

Dissatisfied with the high court verdict, the affected parties and INEC appealed, leading to the Court of Appeal’s decision restoring their registration.