The Social Democratic Party, SDP, has denied reports that its Osun State chapter has collapsed its structure to support the All Progressives Congress, APC, governorship candidate, Mr Bola Oyebamiji, ahead of the August 15, governorship election.

Recall that a factional Osun SDP Chairman, Mr Remi Omidire, had purportedly adopted Oyebamiji for the poll, in a letter addressed to the APC State Chairman, Alhaji Tajudeen Lawal..

Reacting to the development in a statement on Wednesday in Lagos, the Chairman of SDP State Chairmen in Nigeria, Mr Femi Olaniyi (Ferrari), said the Osun chapter of the party remained intact and had not endorsed any political party or candidate.

Olaniyi said the letter, purportedly signed by Omidire, was false and did not emanate from the authentic leadership of the party in Osun under the leadership of Mr Funsho Fabiyi.

Describing it as the handiwork of mischief makers aimed at misleading the public, Olaniyi, said the Fabiyi-led party leadership had neither collapsed its structure nor entered into any alliance with the APC or its governorship candidate.

He maintained that the party remained committed to contesting the governorship election.

“The Osun State chapter of the SDP has not, and will not, collapse its structure for any political party. SDP is not for sale,” he said.

Olaniyi cautioned those behind the alleged fake news to desist from spreading false information or face legal consequences.

“We warn all perpetrators of this fake news to desist immediately or face the full wrath of the law,” he said.

He reiterated that the SDP remained committed to its mission of rescuing Osun State through the democratic process.

He urged party members and supporters to disregard the report, insisting that the SDP remained focused on its campaign ahead of the governorship election.

***Slams Justice Lifu’s action

***Verdict corrected grave miscarriage of justice — ADC

By Ikechukwu Nnochiri, Luminous Jannamike & Shina Abubakar 

ABUJA — The Court of Appeal in Abuja yesterday,  vacated the judgment that directed the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, to deregister African Democratic Congress, ADC, and four other political parties accused of failing to meet constitutional requirements, describing Justice Peter Lifu’s action as judicial rascality, impertinence.

The other parties include  Action Peoples Party, APP; Action Alliance, AA;  Accord Party, AP; and Zenith Labour Party, ZLP.

Recall that Justice Lifu had given the order to deregister the parties, despite the order made by the appellate court on May 22, directing him to stay proceedings in the case, pending the outcome of an appeal by the parties.

The appellate court, in a unanimous decision by a three-member panel of Justices yesterday, held that the order which the Federal High Court issued to the electoral body on June 15, amounted to a nullity.

It held that the High Court wrongly assumed jurisdiction and made the order on an incompetent suit that was filed by a non-juristic entity.

However, ADC in a swift reaction, described the verdict as correction of miscarriage of justice, and hailed the Appeal Court for doing so.

National Chairman of ADC, Senator David Mark, in his reaction, described the party’s deregistration bid as an assault on democracy, while the presidential candidate for the 2027 elections, Atiku Abubakar, said the forthcoming election must be won at the ballot and not in court.

Osun State governor, Ademola Adeleke, who is contesting his second term ticket on the platform of Accord Party, said ruling has put to rest efforts to keep him off the ballot paper.

According to the appellate court, there was no valid suit that could have warranted the consequential order that directed INEC to derecognise the political parties.

It noted that the trial court failed to properly evaluate evidence placed before it, stressing that proof that the parties won various seats in previous elections was ignored.

It also held that the High Court acted in defiance of an order that directed it to stay proceedings in the case.

It held that the high court ought to have dismissed the substantive case for want of jurisdiction and merit.

Consequently, the appellate court, in its lead judgment delivered by Justice Abba Mohammed, held that all the affected political parties remained duly registered.

It allowed separate appeals filed by the political parties and awarded monetary costs against the National Forum of Former Legislators, NFFL, which filed the case against them.

It will be recalled that the appellate court had, on June 16, ordered a stay of execution of the high court judgment, even as it slammed the trial judge for disregarding the judicial hierarchy.

The panel berated Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja for disobeying an order it had made on May 22 directing him to stay proceedings in the case, pending the outcome of an appeal by the parties.

It noted that though the trial judge’s attention had been drawn to the order for a stay of proceedings, he intentionally flouted it and went ahead to deliver judgment.

It held that Justice Lifu’s action was “a form of judicial impertinence,” stressing that the Supreme Court had previously held that a judge who acted in such a manner “is unfit for the bench, as the conduct amounts to judicial rascality.”

The high court had directed INEC to deregister the five political parties, which it said had failed to meet the constitutional requirements needed to warrant their continued existence and participation in future elections. 

It also barred INEC from according further recognition to the parties, accepting nominations of candidates from the affected parties, or giving effect to their activities for purposes of participating in the 2027 general elections.

Justice Lifu ordered the defendants to stop parading themselves as registered political parties in the country, saying he found merit in the suit filed by the NFFL. 

The NFFL had, in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/2026, asked the court to determine whether INEC had a constitutional obligation to remove political parties that failed to meet the electoral performance thresholds set out in Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), as reinforced by the Electoral Act 2022 and INEC’s regulations.

It was the plaintiffs’ position that the five political parties listed as defendants had persistently failed to meet the constitutional benchmarks required to retain their registration.

The former lawmakers stressed that the requirements include winning at least 25 per cent of the votes in a state during a presidential election, or securing at least one elective seat at the national, state or local government level.

They told the court that the ADC and the four other parties had performed poorly in both the 2023 general elections and the by-elections conducted by INEC, thereby failing to win seats across key tiers of government.

The litigants insisted that the continued existence of the ADC and the other defendants as recognised political parties was unlawful and undermined the integrity of the country’s electoral system.

Notably, the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, who is also a defendant in the matter, threw his weight behind the plaintiffs. 

In processes filed before the court, the AGF argued that the continued existence of the said political parties violated extant provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and ultimately undermined the nation’s electoral integrity.

The AGF argued that unless the court intervened, INEC would continue to act in breach of its constitutional duty by retaining parties that had failed to meet the minimum requirements prescribed by law.

However, dissatisfied with the trial court’s verdict, all the defendants, including INEC, urged the appellate court to set it aside.

Verdict corrected grave miscarriage of justice — ADC

Reacting to the verdict yesterday, African Democratic Congress, ADC, hailed it, saying the appellate court found that trial judge, Justice Peter Lifu, had ‘concocted evidence’ in favour of the plaintiffs.

The party, in a statement by the National Publicity Secretary, Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, said the appellate court’s decision vindicated the ADC’s long-held position that the suit was legally flawed, unsupported by evidence and incapable of producing a valid judgment.

Abdullahi said: “The ADC also considers as extraordinary the finding by the Court of Appeal that Justice Peter Lifu concocted evidence in resolving the dispute in favour of the plaintiff.

“We believe this goes to the very heart of the integrity of the judiciary and the judicial process. We note that this is the second time in cases involving the ADC that Justice Peter Lifu would be coming under serious indictment by the superior court for willful disobedience and judicial insubordination and impertinence. 

‘’We, therefore, wonder whether such a roundly discredited judge should be allowed to sit on the bench, even for a day longer.

“In striking out the case for want of jurisdiction, the Court of Appeal declared that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate any legal interest peculiar to themselves, relying instead on speculative assertions that they had previously contested elections and might do so again in future, which the court found insufficient to invoke its jurisdiction. 

“We consider this judgment significant, not merely because it restores the rights of the affected political parties but because it reinforces an enduring constitutional principle: that judicial authority must always be exercised within the bounds of the law, in obedience to superior court orders, and on the basis of evidence properly before it.

“The ADC has always maintained its confidence in the judicial process. We are gratified that the Court of Appeal has reaffirmed the rule of law, corrected a grave miscarriage of justice, and protected the constitutional rights of political parties against unlawful interference.” 

ADC deregistration bid was assault on democracy, David Mark declares

Similarly, the National Chairman of the party, Senator David Mark, declared that the failed attempt to deregister the party was ‘a direct assault on multiparty democracy,’ hailing the Court of Appeal for the ruling.

Mark, in a statement signed by his Special Adviser on Media and Publicity, Kola Ologbondiyan, described the Court of Appeal’s verdict as a victory for the ADC, democracy, constitutionalism and the rule of law, saying it reaffirmed the judiciary’s role as the guardian of democratic values.

“The attempt to deregister the ADC was a direct assault on multiparty democracy and an unfortunate effort to undermine the constitutional right of Nigerians to freely associate and participate in the political process,” Mark declared.

He argued that the implications of the judgment extended far beyond the fortunes of the ADC.

He said it had strengthened confidence in the courts as protectors of constitutional freedoms and political pluralism.

Mark said:  “The verdict is a reassuring reminder that our judiciary can still rise above pressure and protect democracy, political pluralism and the constitutional rights of citizens and political parties.”

The former Senate President also said the judgment had restored confidence in the nation’s judiciary, describing the courts as the last hope of the common man and a dependable defender of the rule of law.

He commended the Justices of the Court of Appeal for what he described as their courage, impartiality and fidelity to justice, expressing confidence that the ruling would further strengthen public trust in Nigeria’s democratic institutions.

On the party’s next assignment, Mark urged ADC candidates, members and supporters across the country to remain united and intensify grassroots mobilisation, ahead of the 2027 general elections.

2027 election must be won at ballot, not in court — Atiku

In his reaction, former Vice President and the party’s presidential candidate for 2027 elections, Atiku Abubakar,  declared that the general election must be decided at the ballot box, not in the courtroom

In a statement issued by his media office in Abuja, Atiku congratulated the Justices of the Court of Appeal for what he described as their courage, fidelity to the Constitution and unwavering commitment to justice, saying the judgment had reinforced public confidence in the judiciary and strengthened constitutional democracy.

“As the nation advances towards the 2027 general elections, political contests must be decided by the votes of Nigerians, not by contrived lawsuits seeking to achieve in the courtroom what cannot be won at the ballot box,” he said.

According to him, the appellate court’s ruling, alongside an earlier judgment by Justice Liman of the Federal High Court, Abuja Division, affirming the Senator David Mark-led National Executive Committee of the ADC, has effectively brought to an end all litigation challenging the party’s leadership ahead of the 2027 general election.

He said the development firmly established the ADC’s legal standing to participate in the polls.

Atiku noted further that the Court of Appeal held that the judgment delivered on June 15 by Justice Lifu was a nullity because it was rendered in disobedience to a subsisting order of the appellate court, adding added that the respondents lacked the locus standi to institute the action.

While describing the plaintiffs’ claims as speculative and legally unsustainable, Atiku also said the appellate court clarified that Section 225A of the Constitution should be interpreted disjunctively rather than conjunctively, holding that the suit was premature because the Osun and Ekiti election cycles were still ongoing when the action was filed.

According to Atiku, the appellate court equally faulted the trial court for disregarding the uncontroverted affidavit evidence presented by the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, confirming that the ADC and the other affected political parties had complied with all constitutional and statutory requirements.

“Having accepted INEC’s evidence, the lower court had no legal basis to manufacture additional conditions in order to arrive at what the Court of Appeal rightly described as a perverse decision,” he added.

Atiku described the judgment as extending far beyond the fortunes of a single political party, saying it represented a victory for constitutional democracy, the rule of law and every Nigerian who believed in free political competition.

Plot to stop Adeleke thwarted — Gov’s camp

Also reacting to the Court of Appeal judgement, the Commissioner for Information and Public Enlightenment in Osun State, Mr Kolapo Alimi, said the ruling had put to rest efforts to keep Governor Ademola Adeleke off the ballot paper.

Alimi, who spoke at an Accord Party rally in Ede yesterday, said the judgement vindicated the party that the APC was afraid of a contest, noting that it had no choice than to face Governor Adeleke’s growing popularity.

He said: “It is crystal clear now that APC is not facing an empty post, there is a divine goal keeper at the goal post and will continue to keep it safe till 2030.

“The Court of Appeal has put to rest the shenanigans of the lower court and the rule of law has prevailed. Governor Adeleke re-election bid is unstoppable and will complete his second term.”

He called on the residents of the state to troop out en masse to vote for Governor Adeleke again during the August 15 polls.

IPAC seeks NJC probe of FHC judgment

On its part, the Inter-Party Advisory Council, IPAC, urged the National Judicial Council, NJC, to investigate court judgments it said were inconsistent with the Constitution, following the Court of Appeal’s decision.

IPAC’s National Publicity Secretary, Comrade Egbeola Wale Martins, said in a statement that the Court of Appeal had delivered a courageous affirmation of constitutional democracy and Nigeria’s multi-party system.

“The appellate court’s decision is a courageous reaffirmation of constitutional democracy, the rule of law, and the sanctity of Nigeria’s multi-party democratic system.

‘’It restores confidence in the judiciary as the last hope of the common man and demonstrates that the constitutional guarantees of political participation and freedom of association remain protected under our democratic order,” the council said.

Former National Publicity Secretary of the New Nigerian Peoples Party, NNPP, and the Convener of the OK Movement, Ladipo Johnson, has insisted that there is no change of leadership in the organization.

There have been reports of appointments of new leaders for the Movement via its official handle even the leadership structure remains the same on the official website.

Explaining this, Johnson told DAILY POST that one of the admins of the X handle, Jackie Wayas, who, according to him, is not part of the leadership team, has hijacked the X handle and uses it to make unauthorised announcements such as the appointment of former presidential candidate and National Chairman of the Inter Party Advisory Council, IPAC, High Chief Peter Ameh, as Director-General and Muhammad Hamisu as National Secretary.

Also, the X handle had announced the Director of the Abuja School of Social and Political Thought, Sam Amadi, as its Head of the Advisory Council.

However, Johnson maintained that John Ughulu remains the Director-General of the political platform comprising the supporters of presidential candidate of the Nigerian Democratic Congress, NDC, Peter Obi and his running mate, Engr, Rabi’u Kwankwaso.

He said that Wayas managed to gain control of the movement’s primary X handle utilizes this hijacked access to broadcast a fake appointment statement.

Johnson stated, “The bottom line is that it is an unfortunate incident that is wrong. It is not correct. John Ughulu is still the DG. It’s difficult for me to say because I know all the parties involved. Yes, and I think that I don’t want to use words such as people being misguided.

“You cannot have personal issues with a DG, and then you now turn it into oh, we want to remove him, and then different people joining up, forgetting that every action will bring about a reaction and it might be inimical to the chances of your principal that you formed the group to work for in the first place.

“If you start fighting on the streets, you are bringing bad publicity, and then you will not know that some of the people urging you on are people from the outside who don’t want you to win in the first place.

“Well, what is happening that has brought it out is that one or two young ones have some issues to grind, maybe with the DG, and the main person took advantage of the fact that she was one of those who had the passwords to the Twitter accounts, to the X account.

“I think she changed the password, and from there began to issue statements ‘We’ve changed this, we’ve changed that.’ So people felt it was coming from the OK Movement. So if you want to put it starkly, the the Twitter account was maybe it was hacked. It wasn’t hacked by her because she had the password, but she can’t say that she issued directives of the leadership.

“She did it alone, but of course she has some support of some youthful people who might not even be members of the OK Movement. But the bottom line is that John Ughulu, along with a gentleman, Alhaji Adeleke. They were the ones many years ago that started this Obi and Kwankwaso and Obi coming together. They had conceptualized it before they even brought it to me.”