Group petitions NJC, CJN over ADC deregistration judgement, seeks sanction against judge

Group petitions NJC, CJN over ADC deregistration judgement, seeks sanction against judge

A civil society organisation, Tap Initiative for Citizens’ Development, has petitioned the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, and the National Judicial Council (NJC), which she chairs, seeking an investigation into the conduct of Judge Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court, Abuja, over his judgement ordering the deregistration of five political parties.

The organisation alleged that Judge Lifu delivered the judgement despite a pending appeal and a subsisting Court of Appeal order staying proceedings in the case.

It urged the NJC, the body with statutory powers to discipline Nigerian judges, to investigate Mr Lifu over “possible judicial misconduct” and sanction the judge of a wrongdoing is established against him.

The petition, dated 16 June (Tuesday) and received by the Office of the CJN on the same day, was signed by the Executive Director of Tap Initiative for Citizens’ Development, Mbasekei Martin Obono, a lawyer. A copy of the petition was shared with PREMIUM TIMES on Tuesday.

The petition said “the Court of Appeal had issued an Enrolment Order expressly granting a stay of proceedings in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/2025, being the very proceedings in which the Federal High Court subsequently proceeded to deliver judgment.”

PREMIUM TIMES reported that Judge Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja, on Monday, ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Accord, Action Alliance (AA), Action Peoples Party (APP) and Zenith Labour Party (ZLP).

The judgement followed a suit filed by the National Forum of Former Legislators, through their counsel, Oladimeji Ekengba, who asked the court to compel INEC to remove the parties from its register for alleged failure to meet constitutional requirements for continued registration.

In the judgement, Mr Lifu agreed with the plaintiff that the affected parties breached constitutional requirements for registered political parties and were therefore liable to deregistration under Section 225(a) of the Nigerian Constitution.

The constitution set the thresholds registered political parties must attain in their performance in the previous election cycle to keep their status.

Under the provision, political parties must, in the minimum, secure at least 25 per cent of votes cast in one state of the federation in a presidential election, or one local government of the state in a governorship election. If they cannot meet poll the fraction of the votes in a presidential or governorship election, they must win at least one ward in the chairmanship election, one seat in the National or State House of Assembly election, or one seat in the Councillorship election.

It gives the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister any political party that fails to meet any of the conditions.

The judge held Monday that none of the five political parties, some of which have fielded formidable candidates in key upcoming elections including the 2027 presidential poll, met any of the conditions and therefore must be detegistered.

Before delivering the judgement, lawyers for some of the affected parties drew the court’s attention to an order of the Court of Appeal issued on 22 May directing the trial court to stay proceedings pending the determination of an interlocutory appeal filed by Accord. The appeal arose from Judge Lifu’s earlier refusal to join Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke, who is seeking a re-election as Accord’s governorship candidate for Osun in two months’ time, as a defendant in the suit. The Osun State governorship election has been slated for Saturday, 15 August.

However, Judge Lifu declined to halt the proceedings. He held that no subsisting order of stay of proceedings from the Court of Appeal had been served on his court before parties adopted their final written addresses and before the matter was fixed for judgement. He also ruled that the law does not recognise the arrest of judgement and concluded that there was no express order preventing him from delivering the decision.

Tap Initiative warned that the development goes beyond court procedure and affects “the stability of democratic governance” in Nigeria.

The group said respect for appellate hierarchy remains central to “the protection of democracy and rule of law”.

It added that the appellate court had already assumed jurisdiction, and any parallel decision at the trial court level risks undermining that authority.

The organisation said such a situation could produce “conflicting judicial outcomes” and weaken public trust in the judiciary.

It maintained that compliance with appellate processes is essential for “legal certainty and democratic order” in the country.

Aside from the judicial hierarchy, the group maintained that the judgement carries wider implications beyond the courtroom.

The group warned that it could “heighten political tension” and disrupt stability in the democratic space.

It said political parties serve as platforms for citizens’ participation, representation, and political association.

The organisation noted that any judicial action affecting party participation also impacts “fundamental democratic rights” of citizens.

It cautioned that the situation could narrow political competition ahead of the 2026 off-cycle governorship elections and the 2027 general elections, and could ultimately limit voter choice in a multi-party democracy.

The group therefore urged the NJC to investigate Judge Lifu over “possible judicial misconduct.”

The group asked the council to determine whether the judgement was delivered “in disregard of pending appellate proceedings” and a subsisting order of stay issued by the Court of Appeal.

It called on the NJC to examine possible breaches of the Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers, including provisions on fairness, diligence, and adherence to due process.

The organisation also urged the council to take “appropriate disciplinary action” if any wrongdoing is established.

It asked the NJC to reaffirm the authority of appellate courts and reinforce compliance with judicial hierarchy within the justice system.

The group concluded that strong disciplinary oversight remains necessary to sustain “public confidence in the judiciary”.