Judge’s absence stalls judgement in suit seeking to deregister ADC, Accord Party, others

The absence of Justice Peter Lifu on Friday stalled the scheduled judgement in the suit seeking the deregistration of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) Accord Party and others over alleged constitutional breaches.

The judge had, on May 20 adjourned till Friday, May 5, 2026 to deliver judgement in the suit marked, FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/2026, instituted by the Incorporated Trustees of the National Forum of Former Legislators against the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and several political parties, including the ADC, Action Alliance, APP, Accord Party and Zenith Labour Party.

After about an hour’s wait by lawyers, litigants in the matter, an official of the court announced that, the judge would not be sitting to deliver the judgement as he was said to be out of Abuja.

The court official said that the new date for the judgement would be communicated to the parties in the matter when it is ready.

Justice Lifu had, last month, fixed the date after dismissing the applications for stay of proceedings and joinder filed by some politicians and parties seeking to be joined in the suit.

Those affected by the ruling on joinder are Ademola Adeleke and Oluwafemi Abayomi Arabambi, both of the Accord party, and Sani Yakubu Noma of the ADC.

In his ruling, Justice Lifu held that granting a stay of proceedings at this stage would cause hardship on the litigants, especially as political parties were already expected to submit names of candidates ahead of the upcoming elections.

The judge noted that the Supreme Court had repeatedly cautioned lower courts against granting an undue stay of proceedings.

He further held that since the applicants had already approached the Court of Appeal, the trial court should be allowed to conclude hearing of the matter unless otherwise directed by the appellate court.

“It is my considered view not to grant the stay except otherwise decided by the upper court,” the judge said, adding that all issues raised by the applicants lacked merit and were accordingly dismissed.

On the applications for joinder, the court held that most of the political parties seeking to be represented were already defendants in the suit, making the inclusion of individual members unnecessary, and consequently dismissed the applications seeking to be joined in the suit by the 8th, 9th, 10th and 11th defendants.

The court also heard arguments on an application by counsel to the Action Peoples Party (APP), Peter Abang, seeking dismissal of the suit on the grounds that issues raised had already been argued before the appellate court.

In a brief ruling, Justice Lifu stated that the court would consider the decision of the Court of Appeal as relates to the matter alongside issues raised by parties before delivering judgment and subsequently, directed parties to amend and adopt their final processes in line with the accelerated hearing earlier ordered by the court.

During the adoption of final processes, counsel to the plaintiff, Yakubu Abdullahi Ruba, SAN, representing the Incorporated Trustees of the National Forum of Former Legislators, argued that the affected political parties failed to satisfy constitutional requirements relating to electoral spread and performance.

Ruba relied on Supreme Court authorities, contending that political parties were required to secure at least 25 per cent of votes in prescribed elections to retain relevance under the law.

He urged the court to order the deregistration of the parties, insisting that none of the defendants had successfully countered the argument.

Representing the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Abdullahi Abdulrahman told the court that the AGF had constitutional powers to defend and support actions aimed at ensuring compliance with the Constitution.

He urged the court to consider whether the political parties listed as 3rd to 7th defendants had breached constitutional provisions.

Counsel for 3rd to 7th defendants all urged the court to dismiss the suit with substantial cost.

At the previous sitting, defence counsel led by Musibau Adetunbi, SAN for Accord Party, Shuaib Enejo Aruwa, SAN for ADC, and other counsel had urged the court to suspend proceedings pending determination of appeals before the Court of Appeal.

They argued that continuing with the hearing while interlocutory appeals were pending could prejudice issues already before the appellate court.

However, the plaintiff opposed the request, arguing that no order from either the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court restrained the Federal High Court from proceeding with the matter.

INEC’s counsel, Haliru Mohammed, informed the court that the commission had already filed a counter-affidavit to the substantive suit.

Justice Lifu, on Wednesday, after taking arguments from parties and adoption of processes, adjourned the matter to June 5 for judgement.