Lawyer of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Dr Alex Adum has called on the National Judicial Council (NJC) to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the Federal High Court judge whose ruling threatened the party’s participation in the 2027 general election, arguing that the judge ignored constitutional provisions and binding evidence before the court.
Speaking in an interview with ARISE NEWS on Wednesday, Adum while reacting to the Court of Appeal’s decision restoring ADC and four other political parties to the register of recognised political parties, described the appellate court’s judgment as a reaffirmation of constitutionalism, the rule of law and multi-party democracy in Nigeria.
“It’s now become incumbent on the National Judicial Council to activate its disciplinary procedures, We expect that this is a time for the NJC to act. The judge failed to consider the evidence that were before him, particularly with respect to the provisions of Section 225A.”
He said the Court of Appeal correctly overturned the lower court’s judgment because the trial judge failed to properly evaluate. “Section 225A was treated with evaluations that are not very rich because if you apply the judicial test to those evaluations, you will not be able to come out with the sound criteria for evaluation or the fine results for evaluation.”
Adum argued that Section 225A of the Constitution provides alternative conditions for political parties to retain their registration. “Those conditions are alternative, they are just disjunctive conditions, they are not conjunctive conditions… even if you win a councillorship election, you have satisfied the conditions stipulated in Section 225A.”
He affirmed that the Supreme Court had already settled the legal position, making the trial court’s decision inconsistent with established judicial precedent. “The Supreme Court of Nigeria have established in the case of AUP versus INEC, that once a party has won one particular councillorship election, that political party has met the requirements of Section 225A.”
He also defended the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). “INEC clearly stated that these five political parties have met the conditions stipulated under Section 225A.”
Adum confirmed that the Court of Appeal also found that those who instituted the case lacked the legal capacity to do so. “The Court of Appeal analysed the decision they were very emphatic that the people who came before the Federal High Court were people who had no juristic personality and as such they lacked the locus standi, the legal capacity to have even instituted the action.”
He accused the trial judge of disregarding established judicial hierarchy by failing to follow binding decisions of superior courts. “Judicial discipline and judicial hierarchy requires that once there is a pronouncement from a superior court, the most fundamental thing and the most prudent thing to do is to obey the decisions of the higher court. This is Justice Lifu’s fate to do.”
Describing the appellate judgment as a victory for democracy, Adum said the decision restored constitutional order and protected Nigeria’s multi-party political system ahead of the 2027 elections. “What happened yesterday in the Court of Appeal is they returned to constitutionalism and the rule of law and multi-party democracy in Nigeria.”
Adum concluded by urging the NJC to exercise its constitutional disciplinary powers. “The NJC, is the only body that has the powers to activate disciplinary procedures against a sitting judicial officer, we expect that this is a time for the NJC to act.”
Erizia Rubyjeana
