Secondus slams court order deregistering four parties, warns of democratic implications

A former National Chairman of Nigeria's Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has voiced strong opposition to a recent court order that mandates the deregistration of four political parties. Uche Secondus described the Federal High Court's judgment, which directed the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to remove the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Action Peoples Party (APP), Action Alliance (AA), Accord Party, and Zenith Labour Party (ZLP) from its register, as a "dangerous assault on the foundational principles of multi-party democracy."

“

not just a setback for the affected parties but a dangerous assault on the foundational principles of multi-party democracy, citizen participation and the rule of law.

The court, presided over by Justice Peter Lifu, ruled that the affected parties failed to meet constitutional requirements for retaining their registration. Secondus argued that this decision, made mid-cycle, could significantly narrow political participation and weaken democratic competition in Nigeria. He noted that some parties had already completed internal processes and were preparing for future electoral activities, making the ruling a critical setback.

“

They are afraid of the election; they want a coronation.

Secondus accused the government of attempting to weaken opposition parties, stating, "They are afraid of the election; they want a coronation." He emphasized that constitutional provisions for party deregistration are typically applied after elections, not during an electoral cycle. "To deregister the parties midway effectively disenfranchises voters, creates political instability and narrows the democratic space," he said, particularly in the context of existing crises within other parties.

“

To deregister the parties midway effectively disenfranchises voters, creates political instability and narrows the democratic space, especially when a crisis has been deliberately injected into other parties.

Describing the judgment as "judicial rascality," Secondus asserted that it promotes political exclusion and disrupts the competitive spirit essential for a healthy democracy. He highlighted the importance of emerging and smaller parties in broadening political participation and ensuring diverse viewpoints are represented. "A robust democracy requires a low barrier to entry for alternative ideas," he stated, warning that dismantling these parties mid-cycle favors the entrenched political establishment and hinders grassroots movements.

“

It’s judicial rascality to endorse political exclusion by dissolving parties midway through a cycle. This obvious disruption creates unnecessary vacuums and chills the competitive spirit necessary for a healthy democracy.