Nigeria’s Court of Appeal has reversed the deregistration of the African Democratic Congress and four other political parties, restoring their legal status and reopening their path to participation in the 2027 general elections.
In a unanimous judgment delivered in Abuja on Tuesday, a three-member appellate panel nullified the June 15 decision of the Federal High Court directing the Independent National Electoral Commission to withdraw recognition from the affected parties. The ADC degistration order is therfore null and void
Alongside the ADC, the parties are the Action Peoples Party, Action Alliance, Accord Party and Zenith Labour Party.
Delivering the lead judgment, Justice Abba Mohammed held that the lower court should not have entertained the case because it was instituted by an entity without the legal capacity to sue. With no competent claimant and, consequently, no valid suit before the court, the consequential orders against INEC and the parties could not stand.
The panel allowed the separate appeals filed by the five parties, declared that they remained duly registered and awarded costs against the National Forum of Former Legislators, which initiated the action.
Evidence the lower court overlooked
The appellate court also found that the Federal High Court failed to evaluate material evidence indicating that the parties had won elective positions in previous elections.
That omission was critical because the underlying dispute centred on Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution, as amended. The provision empowers INEC to deregister political parties that breach registration requirements or fail to satisfy prescribed electoral-performance thresholds.
The former legislators had argued that the five parties performed poorly in the 2023 general elections and subsequent by-elections. They maintained that the parties failed to secure the level of votes or elective representation required for continued registration.
Among the benchmarks cited were securing at least 25 per cent of votes cast in one state during a presidential election or winning at least one elective seat at the federal, state or local-government level.
In Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/2026, the NFFL asked the Federal High Court to determine whether INEC was constitutionally obliged to deregister parties that failed to meet those conditions.
Justice Peter Lifu agreed with the plaintiffs and ordered INEC to stop recognising the five parties. The ruling also barred the commission from accepting their candidates or giving effect to their activities in relation to the 2027 elections.
A stern defence of judicial hierarchy
The Court of Appeal’s decision went beyond party registration. It raised a more fundamental question about obedience to superior court orders.
The appellate panel had, on May 22, directed Justice Lifu to suspend proceedings pending the determination of an appeal. According to the Court of Appeal, the order was brought to the trial judge’s attention, but he proceeded to deliver judgment.
On June 16, the appellate court stayed the execution of the High Court ruling and criticised the trial court’s disregard for judicial hierarchy. It described the conduct as “judicial impertinence” and referenced the Supreme Court’s strong condemnation of judicial officers who knowingly defy binding orders.
This aspect of the judgment carries institutional weight. The authority of Nigeria’s courts depends not only on the quality of decisions but also on consistent respect for the appellate structure. When conflicting judicial actions create uncertainty around political participation, the consequences extend beyond the litigants to electoral administrators, candidates, voters and markets.
A politically consequential intervention
The Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, had supported the plaintiffs at the Federal High Court. In his filings, the AGF argued that retaining parties that failed to satisfy constitutional requirements undermined electoral integrity and placed INEC in continuing breach of its responsibilities.
INEC, however, joined the affected parties in challenging the decision at the Court of Appeal.
The appellate judgment does not abolish the constitutional power to deregister political parties. Rather, it establishes that such a consequential outcome must emerge from a competent action, properly evaluated evidence and strict observance of due process.
That distinction matters. A legal victory has protected the five parties from the immediate threat of deregistration, but it does not permanently exempt any political organisation from constitutional performance requirements.
Market and investor implications
Political stability is an economic asset. Investors assess not only inflation, exchange rates and fiscal policy, but also the predictability of institutions that govern electoral competition and transfers of power.
An electoral environment in which parties can be removed through procedurally defective litigation increases political risk. Conversely, appellate correction demonstrates that Nigeria’s judicial system retains mechanisms for reviewing lower-court errors.
The larger concern is timing. Litigation capable of reshaping the field of contestants close to the 2027 elections could disrupt candidate selection, campaign financing and electoral planning. Speedy resolution of related disputes will therefore be important for confidence.
Brand implications
For the restored parties, registration is merely permission to compete—not proof of political relevance.
The ADC, APP, AA, Accord Party and ZLP must now convert legal survival into organisational credibility. That requires coherent positioning, recognisable leadership, functioning state structures and a persuasive offer to voters.
Political brands cannot rely indefinitely on courtroom victories. Trust is built through internal democracy, disciplined communication and measurable electoral presence.
BRANDECONOMY Insight
The Court of Appeal has protected due process, judicial hierarchy and political pluralism. But it has not settled the broader debate over how Nigeria should balance an open multiparty system with the constitutional demand that registered parties demonstrate genuine electoral viability.
The message is twofold: political parties must earn their continued relevance at the ballot box, while attempts to remove them must comply scrupulously with jurisdiction, evidence and fair procedure. In a democracy, even an argument made in the name of electoral integrity cannot be sustained through an incompetent case.
