The Court of Appeal in Abuja has ordered a stay of execution on a judgment delivered by Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court, which directed the deregistration of the African Democratic Congress, Action Peoples Party, Action Alliance, Accord Party and Zenith Labour Party.
In a strongly worded ruling, the appellate court condemned the conduct of the trial judge, describing his actions as the “highest form of judicial impertinence” and accusing him of disregarding an earlier order of the Court of Appeal.
The panel of justices held that Justice Lifu acted improperly by proceeding to hear and determine the matter despite the pendency of the appeal and the subsisting order of the appellate court. The court stated that the judge’s conduct amounted to “judicial rascality” and undermined the hierarchy of courts.
The Court of Appeal further held that Justice Lifu’s decision to deliver judgment in the face of its directive constituted a direct affront to judicial authority and the constitutional order.
Quoting established Supreme Court precedent, the appellate court noted that a judge who acts in such a manner risks being deemed unfit for the bench because such conduct amounts to judicial recklessness.
“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 judgment despite the express order of this court is a brazen violation of the hierarchy of courts and the 1999 Constitution,” the justices held.
The court added that it was duty-bound to ensure compliance with its orders and therefore granted the application for a stay of execution.
“The application for a stay of execution is hereby granted. The enforcement of the judgment is stayed,” the court ruled.
Justice Lifu had earlier directed the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister the five political parties, holding that they had failed to satisfy the constitutional requirements necessary for their continued registration and participation in future elections.
The appellate court’s decision effectively suspends the implementation of that judgment pending the determination of the substantive appeal.
ADVERTISEMENTS
2026-06-15