DistantNews
Support us
🇳🇬 Nigeria /Disasters & Emergencies

Big Relief for ADC and Other Parties

From ThisDay · () English

Summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.

At a glance

News Named sources Outcome reported
  • Five Nigerian opposition parties have won a reprieve as the Court of Appeal overturned a Federal High Court ruling ordering their deregistration.
  • The appellate court declared the lower court's judgment, which cited poor performance after the 2023 elections, as "null and void" and "perverse."
  • Judges at the appellate court emphasized the importance of respecting judicial hierarchy and warned against overzealousness that could destabilize the country.

A significant legal victory has been secured by five Nigerian opposition parties, including the ADC, APP, AA, AP, and ZLP, following a Court of Appeal ruling that nullified a lower court's order for their deregistration. The Federal High Court had previously mandated the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister these parties based on their performance in the 2023 general elections.

what the learned trial court did amount to judicial impertinence or what the Supreme Court called judicial insubordination.

— Justice Abba MohammedPresiding Justice Abba Mohammed described the Federal High Court's judgment as a serious breach of judicial protocol.

The Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal, in a unanimous decision, described the June 15, 2026 judgment by Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court as "a nullity" and "perverse." The appellate court panel, led by Justice Abba Mohammed, asserted that the trial court lacked the jurisdiction to hear the case and wrongly proceeded with the judgment despite a directive for a stay of proceedings. The court also noted that the initial plaintiff lacked the legal standing to bring the action.

This ruling provides a crucial relief for the affected parties, safeguarding their participation in Nigeria's political landscape ahead of the 2027 elections. The appellate court's strong language, referring to the lower court's decision as "judicial impertinence" and "judicial insubordination," underscores the gravity of the situation and the perceived overreach by the trial judge.

The judgement has also taught them not to be overzealous or allow themselves to be used by politicians for their selfish motives.

— Court of AppealThe appellate court issued a warning against judicial overreach and political influence following the ruling.

The judgment serves as a stern warning to judges against overzealousness and potential manipulation by politicians. The appellate court highlighted that such decisions, if made at higher judicial levels where appeals are not possible, could have severe destabilizing consequences for the nation. The judiciary's integrity and adherence to the rule of law are paramount, and this case emphasizes the need for judges to respect the established hierarchy of courts and act impartially.

They can set the country on fire. Imagine delivering this kind of judgement at a superior court where it cannot be appealed.

— Court of AppealThe appellate court expressed grave concern about the potential consequences of such flawed judgments on national stability.
DistantNews Editorial

Originally published by ThisDay. Summarized and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.

More Stories

From Our Blog