Deregistration: INEC backs political parties, seeks judgment’s stay of execution

Nigeria's Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has filed a motion with the Court of Appeal in Abuja, seeking to halt the execution of a Federal High Court judgment that mandated the deregistration of five political parties. The electoral body has also aligned itself with the notice of appeal submitted by the affected parties challenging the ruling.

The Federal High Court, presided over by Justice Peter Lifu, had previously ordered INEC to deregister the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Action Peoples Party, Action Alliance, Accord Party, and Zenith Labour Party. The court found that these parties failed to meet the constitutional requirements necessary to maintain their registration.

“

My Lords, we are aware of an order that this court made on May 22, which stopped the delivery of the lower court, which was initially reserved for delivery on June 5. 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 the execution of the judgment.

During a hearing at the Court of Appeal, INEC's counsel, Haliru Mohammed, expressed surprise that the lower court issued its judgment despite a prior order from the appellate court on May 22, which had intended to halt the delivery of the judgment. Mohammed stated that INEC was unaware of any notification regarding the judgment's delivery and only learned of it through media reports. Consequently, INEC does not oppose the application for a stay of execution.

Counsel for the ADC, Mr. Shuaibu Aruwa (SAN), informed the appellate court that the party received notification of the judgment via a WhatsApp message from the trial court. Aruwa urged the Court of Appeal to intervene, arguing that the lower court's decision was delivered despite a subsisting stay order. He criticized the trial judge's actions as a challenge to the Court of Appeal's authority and called for "swift and extraordinary measures." Lawyers for the other affected parties also highlighted the potential uncertainty the judgment could create for the by-elections scheduled for June 20 in six states, emphasizing the appellate court's supervisory role.

“

Sincerely, my Lords, a lot has happened to the judiciary and this profession. What the trial judge did was dare this Court of Appeal by insisting that no one could arrest his judgment, even after his attention was drawn to the stay order from this court. The action of the trial judge calls for swift and extraordinary measures from this court. We have come to the stage where this court should press the reset button. We are calling on this court to exercise disciplinary jurisdiction under Section 6 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended. We urge this court to take disciplinary steps by immediately suspending that judgment. This court has the power to protect its own integrity. We pray this court suspends the judgment immediately without further delay.