The Court of Appeal in Abuja on Tuesday suspended the execution of a Federal High Court judgment that ordered the deregistration of five political parties, including the African Democratic Congress, ADC.

DAILY POST reported that the appellate court granted a stay of execution of the judgment delivered by Justice Peter Odo Lifu of the Federal High Court, Abuja, which had directed the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, to deregister the ADC, Action Peoples Party, APP, Action Alliance, AA, Accord Party, AP, and Zenith Labour Party, ZLP.

In a strongly worded ruling, the Appeal Court condemned the lower court’s action, describing it as “the highest form of judicial impertinence” and a direct violation of the hierarchy of courts.

The panel held that Justice Lifu proceeded with the matter despite an earlier order of the Court of Appeal and while the case was still pending before it.

According to the court, such conduct amounted to judicial rascality and an affront to the constitutional structure governing judicial authority in Nigeria.

The justices stressed that lower courts are bound by the decisions and directives of higher courts and must not act contrary to them.

“Courts are enjoined to protect their integrity. This Court has supervisory authority over the trial court. The decision of the lower court to proceed with the judgment despite the express order of this court is a brazen violation of the hierarchy of the courts and the 1999 Constitution,” the appellate court ruled.

The court subsequently ordered that the enforcement of the Federal High Court judgment be stayed pending further proceedings.

The ruling effectively restores the affected parties’ legal status for now and removes the immediate threat to their participation in future elections.

How it all started

The controversy began on Monday when Justice Peter Odo Lifu of the Federal High Court, Abuja, ordered INEC to deregister the ADC, Accord Party, and three other political parties over alleged constitutional violations.

The judgment stemmed from a suit filed by the Incorporated Trustees of the National Forum of Former Legislators (NFFL), which argued that the parties failed to satisfy constitutional requirements necessary for their continued recognition.

Justice Lifu directed INEC to stop recognising the parties, accepting nominations from them, or permitting them to participate in the 2027 general elections.

The court also ordered the affected parties to cease presenting themselves as registered political parties.

The plaintiffs contended that the parties had failed to meet constitutional electoral performance thresholds, including winning elective offices or securing the minimum percentage of votes required under the law.

They contended that allowing such parties to remain registered undermined electoral integrity and constituted a waste of public resources.

Judiciary still has opportunity to redeem itself – Atiku

Presidential candidate of the ADC, Atiku Abubakar, welcomed the Appeal Court’s decision, describing it as a victory for democracy and constitutional order.

Reacting to the ruling, Atiku, in a statement via X on Tuesday, noted that it was particularly significant that INEC itself sought the stay of execution.

He warned against what he described as increasing judicial contradictions and politically charged decisions that have placed the judiciary under public scrutiny.

According to him, any attempt to weaken Nigeria’s democratic process through judicial manipulation poses a grave threat to the nation.

“I welcome the Court of Appeal’s decision to stay the execution of the Federal High Court judgment seeking the deregistration of our great party, the ADC, and four other political parties.

“The disturbing spectacle of judicial contradictions and politically charged rulings playing out in our courts has placed the judiciary under intense public scrutiny.

“Any attempt to undermine Nigeria’s hard-won democracy through judicial manipulation is a grave danger to the Republic,” Atiku stated.

He added that the judiciary still has an opportunity to redeem itself by standing firmly on the side of the Constitution, the rule of law, and the Nigerian people.

What happened smacks of judicial insubordination — Senior lawyer

Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Jibrin Okutepa, also criticised the Federal High Court judgment, describing it as a clear case of judicial insubordination.

Speaking on Arise Television’s Prime Time programme on Tuesday, Okutepa argued that under Nigerian law, lower courts have an obligation to obey and enforce decisions of superior courts regardless of their personal views on such rulings.

He maintained that the rule of law depends on strict adherence to judicial hierarchy.

According to him, a High Court has no discretion to disregard or question an order issued by the Court of Appeal.

“What happened appeared to be a problem of judicial insubordination, judicial impertinence.

“The High Court is obligated mandatorily to obey and enforce the orders of the Court of Appeal without question; whether that order was rightly or wrongly given.

“The duty under our law is for the lower court to bow in obedience to the order from the higher court.

“Where the rule of law holds sway, no one, no matter what status, has the audacity of arrogance to question the authority of the court,” he said.

DAILY POST reports that his comments echoed concerns raised by the Appeal Court regarding respect for judicial hierarchy and the integrity of the judiciary.

‘More deregistration coming’ — Oseni Rufai

Meanwhile, Arise Television anchor Rufai Oseni has alleged that the attempted deregistration of opposition parties could be part of a broader effort to reshape the political landscape ahead of the 2027 elections.

Speaking on The Morning Show on Tuesday, Oseni described the Federal High Court judgment as a “test run” aimed at gauging public reaction before more far-reaching actions are taken.

He claimed there may be attempts to prevent major opposition figures, including Peter Obi and Atiku Abubakar, from appearing on the ballot in 2027.

“ADC and NDC should be careful because there will be attempts, and this is me predicting now, to ensure that Obi, Atiku, and other big contenders are not on the ballot.

“What you saw yesterday is just a test. This is not the real place where the whole thing is going.

“They want to see the reactions of Nigerians. More is still coming,” Oseni said.

He questioned the basis of the deregistration judgment, arguing that some of the affected parties had recorded electoral victories in recent elections and therefore did not meet the criteria for deregistration.

Oseni further called for urgent judicial reforms, warning that Nigerians must remain vigilant in defending democratic institutions ahead of the next general election.

According to him, protecting the integrity of the judiciary has become just as important as addressing the country’s security challenges.

Nobody is safe when courts ignore boundaries — Analyst

A political analyst and communication expert at Peaceland University, Enugu, Nduka Odo, has warned that democracy is endangered when institutions fail to respect constitutional boundaries and judicial hierarchy.

Speaking with DAILY POST on Tuesday while reacting to the Court of Appeal’s decision to stay the execution of the Federal High Court judgment ordering the deregistration of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and four other political parties, Odo said the issue transcends partisan interests and touches on the foundation of the rule of law.

According to him, the controversy is not about supporting the ADC, Accord Party, or any of the affected parties, but about whether a lower court can act in a manner that appears to disregard the authority of a superior court.

He warned that once such a precedent is allowed to stand, no individual or institution would be immune from similar actions in the future.

“Today, it may be a political party. Tomorrow, it could be a governor, a legislator, a businessman, or an ordinary citizen. The rule of law survives only when everyone agrees to play by the same rules,” he said.

Odo also noted the irony of politicians who previously applauded judicial interventions when such decisions favoured their interests but now criticise the judiciary when outcomes go against them.

He stressed that institutions are built to serve society beyond immediate political interests, warning that precedents established Today could have far-reaching consequences Tomorrow.

The communication expert further argued that democracy is sustained not by politicians but by strong and independent institutions.

“The real lesson here is that democracy is not protected by politicians; it is protected by strong institutions. The legislature must be independent. The judiciary must be courageous. Electoral bodies must be impartial. Once any arm of government begins to function according to the wishes of another, democracy starts losing its meaning.

“The Appeal Court’s decision may have provided temporary relief for the affected parties, but the bigger challenge remains rebuilding public confidence in institutions that must be seen as fair, consistent, and faithful to the Constitution,” Odo added.