EDITORIAL: Party deregistration: Judicial rascality must stop!

Nigeria’s democratic process received yet another jolt in the build-up to the 2027 general elections recently, with a Federal High Court, Abuja, judgment that ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister five political parties for purportedly failing to meet the constitutional threshold needed to continue to exist.

Join the Premium Times WhatsApp Community For Quick Access To News and Happenings Around You.

Open in WhatsApp

The Justice Peter Lifu judgment against the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Action Alliance (AA), Action Peoples Party (APP), Accord Party (AP) and Zenith Labour Party (ZLP), came barely a week after they, along with other parties, had concluded their primaries for the selection of flag bearers for next year’s polls.

This created confusion due to how it would have affected the parties in the off-cycle governorship contests in Ekiti State last Saturday, and on 15 August for Osun State, with Governor Ademola Adeleke being the candidate of AP, where he recently defected to from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). ADC’s presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, appears to be the prime target of the masterminds of this discredited judgment.

The judgment, evidently, went against the grain of judicial procedure, signalling the abuse of court process. The parties concerned had filed an appeal against the proceedings at the Court of Appeal, and this was slated for hearing on 20 October. Justice Lifu was duly served the notice of appeal, and was reminded about this by the counsel to the defendant. Yet, he went ahead with the judgment.

For context, Section 225 (A) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, provides for the de-registration of parties that fail to obtain the following in a general election: 25 per cent of votes in (i) one of the states of the federation in a presidential election or (ii) one local government of a state in a governorship election. (C) Failure to win at least (i) one ward in a chairmanship election, (ii) one seat in a national or State House of Assembly election, or (iii) one seat in a councillorship election.

Curiously, the plaintiff in the case is the National Forum of Former Legislators (NFFL). Questions have been raised across a broad spectrum of Nigerians concerning the group’s locus standi to file such a case; and in whose interest it sought to do so. Interestingly, right from the outset, INEC has been of the firm view that the political parties do not fall within the categories contemplated in Section 225 (A).

Cheeringly, the Court of Appeal, Abuja, has issued a stay of execution of this reckless judgment following a swift appeal filed by INEC and the five parties involved on Tuesday. The plot to shrink the political space, which the suit represents, does not go down well with a lot of Nigerians. Members of the NFFL should, therefore, be seen for whom they are – meddlesome interlopers, who should be checkmated in the larger interest of our democracy.

Stay Ahead with Premium Times

Add as a preferred source on Google

In arresting the judgment, the Court of Appeal carpeted Justice Lifu for his judicial rascality. It stated that, “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 courts and the provisions of the Constitution.” The higher court had given its first order on 22 May, which was mindlessly violated.

The reproach of Mr Lifu’s judgment should not only end with the reprimand of the Court of Appeal. PREMIUM TIMES insists that his misconduct should be referred to the National Judicial Council (NJC) for punitive action. An errant conduct like this from the bench, if it goes unpunished, entrenches indiscipline and judicial anarchy. Such abuses have gone on for years with the culprits only receiving slaps on the wrist. There is no way this would enable the clamour for rebirth of the judiciary.

Multipartism is one of the irreducible elements of democracy. Therefore, any attempt to constrict or kill it, narrows electoral choice at the polls and inevitably imperils democracy. The country has confronted this anti-democratic tendency before when the late legal icon, Gani Fawehinmi, challenged INEC’s attempt to impose restrictive guidelines for the existence of political parties, which affected his National Conscience Party (NCP), up to the Supreme Court. Gani won in a landmark judgment, which enlarged the democratic space.

READ ALSO: Deregistration of ADC, others draws backlash as opposition vows legal fight

However, in the Fourth Alteration of the 1999 Constitution by the National Assembly in 2010, the vexed issue returned, with its entrenchment in Section 225. But, in our considered view, these provisions do not serve democratic objectives. They are absolutely inimical to them. We, therefore, call on the apex court to declare them as such.

There is every reason to believe that NNFF’s questionable suit has the blessings of the powers that be. The Attorney General of Federation (AGF), Lateef Fagbemi, for instance, backed it. In fact, he filed a notice before a Federal High Court, Abuja, with suit number FGH/ABJ/CS/2637/2026, in a joinder. He argued that as the “custodian and protector of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,” he was duty bound to support the action, which was aimed at enforcing constitutional provisions.

Besides, the Chief of Staff to President Bola Tinubu, Femi Gbajabiamila, who is a former Speaker of the House of Representatives, had convened a meeting of the NFFL late in January, during which the group endorsed Mr Tinubu as its sole candidate for the 2027 presidential poll.

We, therefore, urge all involved in the country’s journey towards the next general elections to do so in deference to the rules of the game and within the ambit of law.