The scheduled judgment in a suit seeking the deregistration of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Accord Party and three other political parties was on Friday stalled following the absence of Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court, Abuja.
Justice Lifu had earlier fixed June 5, 2026, for judgment in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/2026, filed by the Incorporated Trustees of the National Forum of Former Legislators against the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and several political parties.
The parties listed as defendants in the suit include the ADC, Accord Party, Action Alliance (AA), Action Peoples Party (APP), and Zenith Labour Party (ZLP).
However, after lawyers and litigants waited for about two hours in court on Friday, a court official announced that the judge would not be sitting, as he was reportedly out of Abuja.
According to the official, a fresh date for the judgment would be communicated to all parties in due course.
The development comes weeks after Justice Lifu dismissed applications seeking a stay of proceedings and requests for joinder filed by some politicians and party members.
Among those affected by the ruling were Governor Ademola Adeleke, Oluwafemi Abayomi Arabambi of the Accord Party, and Sani Yakubu Noma of the ADC.
In dismissing the applications, the judge held that granting a stay of proceedings at that stage would cause hardship to litigants, particularly as political parties were expected to submit candidates’ names ahead of forthcoming elections.
He also noted that the Supreme Court had consistently cautioned lower courts against unnecessarily halting proceedings and ruled that the trial court should be allowed to conclude the matter unless directed otherwise by the Court of Appeal.
“It is my considered view not to grant the stay except otherwise decided by the upper court,” Justice Lifu had stated while dismissing the applications for lacking merit.
The court equally rejected applications for joinder, holding that the political parties involved were already defendants in the suit and that the participation of individual members was unnecessary.
During earlier proceedings, counsel to the Action Peoples Party (APP), Peter Abang, had urged the court to dismiss the suit, arguing that issues raised therein had already been considered by the appellate court.
Justice Lifu, in a brief ruling, stated that the court would examine the Court of Appeal’s position alongside submissions made by all parties before delivering judgment.
At the hearing, counsel to the plaintiff, Yakubu Abdullahi Ruba, SAN, argued that the affected political parties failed to meet constitutional requirements relating to electoral spread and performance.
Relying on Supreme Court authorities, Ruba contended that political parties are required to secure at least 25 per cent of votes in prescribed elections to justify their continued registration and relevance under the law.
He urged the court to order the deregistration of the parties, insisting that the defendants failed to effectively challenge the arguments presented by the plaintiff.
Representing the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Abdullahi Abdulrahman told the court that the AGF possesses constitutional powers to support actions aimed at ensuring compliance with constitutional provisions and urged the court to determine whether the affected parties had violated those provisions.
However, counsel representing the defendant political parties urged the court to dismiss the suit and award substantial costs against the plaintiff.
At the previous hearing, senior lawyers including Musibau Adetunbi, SAN, for the Accord Party, and Shuaib Enejo Aruwa, SAN, for the ADC, had sought a suspension of proceedings pending the determination of appeals already before the Court of Appeal.
They argued that continuing with the trial while interlocutory appeals remained unresolved could prejudice issues currently before the appellate court.
The plaintiff opposed the request, maintaining that no order from either the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court restrained the Federal High Court from proceeding with the matter.
Counsel to INEC, Haliru Mohammed, also informed the court that the electoral commission had filed a counter-affidavit in opposition to the substantive suit.
The case is expected to resume on a date yet to be announced for the delivery of judgment.
Comments