NDC Appeals Deregistration Ruling, Senior Lawyers Raise Jurisdiction Questions

The Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) is challenging a Federal High Court ruling that nullified a prior judgment ordering its registration by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). The opposition party maintains its legal standing, asserting that the recent ruling did not mandate its deregistration and that it remains a validly registered political entity. The NDC has initiated the process to appeal the decision at the Court of Appeal.

The party has assured its presidential candidate, Mr. Peter Obi, and its supporters that there is no cause for alarm regarding participation in the 2027 general elections. The NDC described the Lokoja Federal High Court's decision as legally unsound and an abuse of the court process, alleging a plot to curtail democratic space.

“

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) and a faction of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) condemned the ruling, warning that no opposition party was safe if such action was allowed to stand.

Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) have raised concerns about the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court, arguing that it lacks the authority to overturn a judgment from a court of equal standing. They contend that such power rests solely with the Court of Appeal.

“

The court upheld the application filed by the Peace Movement Party (PMP), ruling that the party was a necessary party to the suit.

Peter Obi, the NDC's presidential candidate, echoed these sentiments, stating that federal government forces are attempting to prevent his participation in the 2027 presidential race. He expressed confidence that these efforts would ultimately fail. The African Democratic Congress (ADC) and a faction of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) also condemned the ruling, warning of the implications for other opposition parties.

Justice Isah Dashen, the trial judge, ruled that all relevant parties must be heard before a substantive decision could be made. The court upheld an application by the Peace Movement Party (PMP), deeming it a necessary party to the suit. The judge declared the earlier judgment constitutionally defective for being delivered without hearing all interested parties, rendering the entire process null and void. The court ordered the restoration of the status quo prior to the December 2025 judgment and that the substantive suit begin anew, citing suppressed material facts in the earlier proceedings.

“

According to the judge, the earlier judgment was constitutionally defective as it was delivered without hearing from all interested parties. He declared that such an omission rendered the entire process null and void.