Court to Decide on Deregistration of ADC, Accord, and Others on March 24

The Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed March 24 for ruling in a joinder application in a suit seeking to compel the deregistration of the African Democratic Congress, ADC, Accord Party, Zenith Labour Party, ZLP, and Action Alliance, AA, over alleged non-compliance with constitutional requirements.

The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/25, was instituted by the Incorporated Trustees of the National Forum of Former Legislators, NFFL, against the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, the Attorney General of the Federation, AGF, and the affected political parties.

The initial originating summons had only the ADC as the political party targeted for deregistration but was subsequently amended to include the four others whose continued existence were said to have constituted a breach of the Constitution.

At the proceedings on Tuesday, various lawyers announced appearance for the political parties involved except Action Alliance AA which has two different legal practitioners from different law firms representing it.

The two lawyers claiming representations for AA and who stood their grounds on legitimacy are Ibrahim Yakubu and Bello Lukman.

In the drama that ensued, the presiding judge, Justice Peter Lifu, asked the counsel whether they were together, to which both confirmed they had separate letters of instruction.

Justice Lifu directed them to reconcile, warning that the court would “do the needful” if they failed to put their house in order.

In another development, Counsel to Accord Party, Mr Musibau Adetunbi, SAN, moved an application praying for order of the court to find further counter affidavit against joining the party in the deregisteration battle.

Adetunbi argued that the further counter affidavit was necessary to accommodate some salient facts omitted in the earlier one.

His motion brought pursuant to Order 26 Rule 1 and Order 66 Rule 8 was predicated on seven grounds.

The Accord Party lawyer pleaded with the court to allow the further counter affidavit in the interest of justice and to assist the court in arriving at a just conclusion.

The move was however vehemently opposed by the plaintiff who insisted that further counter affidavit was not necessary because no new fact was introduced in the amended originating summons.

Ruba, who argued for the plaintiff, insisted that the application to file further counter affidavit was incompetent and unknown to law since no new facts were introduced and urged the judge to decline granting the request.

The court thereafter fixed March 24 for ruling on the application and hearing of other motions.

Similarly, lead counsel to the plaintiff, Yakubu Abdullahi Ruba, SAN, informed the court of filing an application to amend the originating summons, dated January 28 and which had been filed and served on all parties.

Respondents, through their respective lawyers confirmed receipt and that they had filed counter affidavits.

Counsel for some respondents, including S.E. Aruwa, SAN, applied for extension of time to regularise processes and also brought a motion on notice challenging the court’s jurisdiction.

Plaintiff counsel, Ruba opposed the application for enlargement of time, while counsel to the 5th defendant told the court he had just been briefed and requested time to respond.

After hearing arguments, Justice Lifu granted the motion for extension of time as prayed and deemed the plaintiff’s reply on points of law properly filed.

The court thereafter adjourned to March 24 for ruling on the joinder application brought by the plaintiff.

Speaking to journalists after the proceedings, Ruba said the suit seeks a judicial interpretation of constitutional and statutory provisions governing the registration and continued recognition of political parties in Nigeria.

According to court documents, the action was commenced by originating summons pursuant to Section 225(A) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), Section 75(4) of the Electoral Act, 2022, and relevant provisions of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2019.

The plaintiffs contend that INEC is constitutionally bound to deregister parties that fail to meet minimum electoral performance thresholds, including securing at least 25 per cent of votes cast in one state in a presidential election or winning seats at any level of government.

In an affidavit in support of the originating summons, deposed to by Igbokwe Raphael Nnanna, Chairman, Board of Trustees and National Coordinator of the NFFL, the group accused INEC of neglecting its constitutional duty by continuing to recognise parties that have allegedly failed to win any elective office or meet prescribed benchmarks since their registration.

The plaintiffs are seeking declaratory orders compelling INEC to enforce constitutional thresholds, as well as mandatory and perpetual injunctions restraining the commission from recognising or giving effect to the political activities of the affected parties pending full compliance.

They argued that allowing such parties to participate in the 2027 general elections would clog ballot papers, waste public resources and undermine electoral integrity.