The Court of Appeal in Abuja has reinstated the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Accord Party, Action Peoples Party (APP), Action Alliance (AA) and Zenith Labour Party (ZLP), setting aside a Federal High Court judgment that ordered their deregistration by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

In a unanimous judgment delivered by a three-member panel led by Justice Abba Mohammed, the appellate court declared the lower court’s decision a nullity, holding that the Federal High Court lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the suit and proceeded to deliver judgment despite a subsisting Court of Appeal order staying further proceedings.

The ruling has been welcomed by the affected political parties, their leaders and the Inter-Party Advisory Council (IPAC), who described it as a victory for constitutional democracy, the rule of law and Nigeria’s multi-party system.

The five parties had appealed the judgment of Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court, which directed INEC to deregister them over alleged failure to satisfy constitutional requirements after the 2023 general elections.

The Court of Appeal faulted the trial court for delivering judgment despite an existing order restraining it from taking further steps in the matter, including the delivery of judgment.

The appellate court described the lower court’s action as “judicial impertinence” and “judicial insubordination,” holding that the plaintiff lacked the requisite locus standi to institute the suit.

It also found that evidence before the court established that the affected parties complied with Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), thereby setting aside the deregistration order.

The suit had been instituted by the National Forum of Former Legislators (NFFL), which argued that INEC was constitutionally obliged to deregister political parties that failed to meet electoral performance thresholds stipulated in the Constitution and the Electoral Act.

The Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), had supported the plaintiffs’ position, while INEC and the affected political parties challenged the Federal High Court’s decision.

In a statement signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, the ADC described the judgment as a vindication of its long-held position that the deregistration case was legally defective and unsupported by credible evidence.

The party welcomed the appellate court’s findings, including its criticism of the conduct of the trial judge, whom it said was faulted for relying on evidence not supported by the record and for proceeding despite the subsisting stay of proceedings.

According to the ADC, the Court of Appeal also upheld its argument that the plaintiffs lacked the legal standing to institute the suit and reaffirmed that INEC presented unchallenged evidence showing the party met constitutional requirements for continued registration.

The party further noted that the appellate court overturned the trial court’s findings regarding its elected representatives, holding that there was no evidence to support the conclusion that its lawmakers had defected to another political party.

Mark, Atiku, Adeleke welcome ruling

Reacting to the judgment, ADC National Chairman, Senator David Mark, described the verdict as “a triumph for democracy and the rule of law.”

In a statement issued by his Special Adviser on Media and Publicity, Kola Ologbondiyan, Mark said the ruling restored confidence in the judiciary and reaffirmed its role as the last hope of the common man.

He described the attempt to deregister the ADC as an assault on Nigeria’s multi-party democracy and urged party members to intensify mobilisation ahead of the 2027 general elections.

“Our attention now returns fully to building a stronger, more united and people-oriented political platform that will offer Nigerians a credible alternative in 2027,” he said.

Former Vice President and ADC presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, also hailed the judgment, describing it as a reaffirmation of the supremacy of the rule of law.

In a statement issued by his media office, Atiku congratulated the Court of Appeal justices for their commitment to justice and constitutionalism.

He said the judgment, alongside an earlier Federal High Court decision upholding the Senator David Mark-led National Executive Committee of the ADC, had removed the legal obstacles to the party’s participation in the 2027 elections.

Atiku warned against using the courts and other state institutions as political tools, insisting that electoral contests should be decided by voters rather than litigation.

“As the nation moves steadily towards the 2027 general election, political contests must be decided by the votes of Nigerians—not by contrived lawsuits designed to secure in the courtroom what cannot be achieved through the ballot,” he said.

Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke, the Accord Party’s governorship candidate for the August 15, 2026 election, also welcomed the judgment, saying it reaffirmed the party’s legal status ahead of the poll.

Describing the ruling as another victory for democracy and the rule of law, Adeleke urged party leaders, youths, women and supporters to focus on grassroots mobilisation and preparations for the governorship election.

IPAC: Victory for constitutional democracy

The Inter-Party Advisory Council (IPAC) also applauded the Court of Appeal for overturning the Federal High Court’s decision, describing the judgment as a major victory for constitutional democracy and the rule of law.

In a statement by its National Publicity Secretary, Comrade Egbeola Wale Martins, the council said the ruling reaffirmed Nigeria’s commitment to constitutional governance, freedom of association and the preservation of its multi-party democratic system.

IPAC said the decision restored public confidence in the judiciary and underscored the appellate courts’ role in safeguarding democratic institutions.

The council also renewed its call on the National Judicial Council (NJC) to investigate judicial decisions that are inconsistent with constitutional provisions, arguing that holding erring judicial officers accountable would strengthen confidence in the justice system and help prevent avoidable political disputes.