Court of Appeal Voids Order to Deregister Five Political Parties
Translated from English, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.
At a glance
- The Court of Appeal in Abuja has overturned a lower court's decision ordering the deregistration of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and four other political parties.
- The appellate court ruled that the trial court lacked jurisdiction because the plaintiff, the Incorporated Trustees of the National Forum of Former Legislators, did not have the legal standing to file the suit.
- The ruling allows the ADC, Action Peoples Party, Action Alliance, Accord Party, and Zenith Labour Party to remain registered, with the Court of Appeal awarding costs against the plaintiff.
The Court of Appeal in Abuja has delivered a significant victory for the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and four other political parties, nullifying a Federal High Court judgment that had ordered their deregistration. The appellate court's decision, delivered by a three-member panel, effectively clears the path for these parties to continue operating, particularly with the 2027 general elections in view.
The trial court was wrong to have assumed jurisdiction in the suit filed by a non-juristic person.
The crux of the appellate court's ruling centered on the jurisdiction of the trial court. Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court had initially ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister the five parties for failing to meet constitutional thresholds. However, the Court of Appeal found that the trial court erred by assuming jurisdiction in a suit filed by the Incorporated Trustees of the National Forum of Former Legislators (NFFL). The appellate judges unanimously agreed that the NFFL lacked the legal standing, or locus standi, to bring the case, rendering the lower court's judgment "null and void."
The evidence before the court clearly shows a compliance with Section 225A of the constitution.
Beyond the jurisdictional issue, the Court of Appeal also addressed the merits of the case, noting that the evidence presented clearly demonstrated compliance with Section 225A of the constitution, contrary to the trial court's findings. The appellate court did not mince words regarding the trial judge's actions, with one judge stating that the refusal to obey a prior appellate ruling for a stay of proceedings amounted to "judicial impertinence or what the Supreme Court called judicial insubordination." The NFFL has been ordered to pay N1 million in costs to the affected parties.
What the learned trial court did amounts to judicial impertinence or what the Supreme Court called judicial insubordination.
Originally published by ThisDay in English. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.