By Ahmed Yusuf, Abuja
National News – Opposition political parties and key political figures have condemned a Federal High Court judgment directing the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Accord Party, Action Peoples Party (APP), Action Alliance (AA), and Zenith Labour Party (ZLP), describing the ruling as a threat to Nigeria’s democracy ahead of the 2027 general elections.
Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja issued the order following a suit filed by the National Forum of Former Legislators, which argued that the affected parties failed to meet constitutional requirements for continued registration, including electoral performance thresholds stipulated under Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
The plaintiffs maintained that the parties performed poorly in the 2023 general elections and subsequent by-elections, failing to secure elective positions at the federal, state, or local government levels. They urged the court to compel INEC to deregister the parties before preparations for the 2027 elections advance further.
Reacting to the judgment, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar described the ruling as a dangerous attack on Nigeria’s multiparty democracy. In a statement issued by his media aide, Phrank Shaibu, Atiku argued that the judgment was delivered despite a subsisting Court of Appeal order staying proceedings in the matter.
He warned that disregarding the appellate court’s directive undermines the rule of law and raises concerns about judicial independence. Atiku further alleged that the ruling forms part of a broader effort to weaken opposition parties ahead of the 2027 elections.
Similarly, Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke faulted the judgment, insisting that it violated an earlier Court of Appeal order. Through his spokesman, Olawale Rasheed, the governor called on supporters to remain calm, expressing confidence that the appellate court would address the matter.
Adeleke assured members of the Accord Party that the party would remain on the ballot for the forthcoming Osun governorship election and urged them to continue mobilisation efforts.
The ADC also rejected the ruling, describing it as unconstitutional and politically motivated. In a statement signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, the party argued that INEC had previously informed the court that the ADC had not breached any constitutional or legal requirements warranting deregistration.
The party expressed concern that the judgment was delivered despite the pending appeal and accused powerful interests of attempting to shrink Nigeria’s democratic space by targeting opposition parties.
ADC National Chairman, Senator David Mark, described the ruling as “an arrow fired at the heart of Nigeria’s democracy,” expressing confidence that higher courts would overturn the decision. He urged party members and supporters nationwide to remain calm, assuring them that the party would remain active in the political process ahead of 2027.
The Kwara State chapter of the ADC also condemned the judgment, arguing that electoral performance alone cannot serve as a constitutional basis for dissolving political parties. The chapter warned that enforcing the ruling could undermine public confidence in the country’s democratic institutions.
Other opposition figures equally criticised the decision. Yunusa Tanko, a former spokesman for Peter Obi’s Presidential Campaign Council and National Coordinator of the Obidient Movement Worldwide, described the ruling as unnecessary and capable of creating political tension.
The Social Democratic Party’s National Publicity Secretary, Rufus Aiyenigba, characterised the judgment as a “recipe for national crisis,” while a faction of the Peoples Democratic Party led by Tanimu Turaki said the ruling could erode public confidence in both the judiciary and the electoral system.
However, the National Publicity Secretary of the Nigeria Democratic Congress, Osa Director, urged affected parties to pursue legal remedies through the courts, noting that they retain the constitutional right to appeal the judgment.
The controversy is expected to generate further legal and political debate as stakeholders await the outcome of appellate court proceedings and clarification on the future status of the affected political parties.
