Appeal Court judgment: Evidence was concocted in deregistration suit – ADC

By Luminous Jannamike

The African Democratic Congress, ADC, on Tuesday hailed the Court of Appeal’s unanimous decision overturning the Federal High Court judgment ordering its deregistration, saying the appellate court found that trial judge, Justice Peter Lifu, had ‘concocted evidence’ in favour of the plaintiffs.

The ruling effectively ends, for now, the legal battle over the party’s existence, affirming that the ADC remains a duly recognised political party under the Constitution and the Electoral Act and freeing it to focus on its political activities instead of defending its survival in court.

The party made this known in a statement by its National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, who said the appellate court’s decision vindicated the ADC’s long-held position that the suit was legally flawed, unsupported by evidence and incapable of producing a valid judgment.

Abdullahi said: “The ADC also considers as extraordinary the finding by the Court of Appeal that Justice Peter Lifu concocted evidence in resolving the dispute in favour of the plaintiff.

“We believe this goes to the very heart of the integrity of the judiciary and the judicial process. We note that this is the second time in cases involving the ADC that Justice Peter Lifu would be coming under serious indictment by the superior court for wilful disobedience and judicial insubordination and impertinence. We therefore wonder whether such a roundly discredited judge should be allowed to sit on the bench even for a day longer.”

Beyond setting aside the lower court’s judgment in its entirety, the party said the appellate court held that the plaintiffs lacked the legal standing to bring the suit, having failed to establish any personal legal interest beyond speculative claims that they had contested elections in the past and might do so again in future.

“In striking out the case for want of jurisdiction, the Court of Appeal declared that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate any legal interest peculiar to themselves, relying instead on speculative assertions that they had previously contested elections and might do so again in future, which the court found insufficient to invoke its jurisdiction,” the statement said.

The court also found, according to the ADC, that the plaintiffs failed to prove their claims with credible evidence, while accepting unchallenged evidence from the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, that the party had met all constitutional and electoral requirements for its continued existence.

The ruling also addressed the status of the party’s elected representatives, with the ADC saying the appellate court rejected the trial court’s conclusion that its lawmakers had defected to another political party, holding that no evidence was presented to support such a finding despite affidavit evidence showing the party had elected representatives, including three members from Kogi State.

“The Court equally rejected the reasoning adopted by the trial court concerning elected members of the ADC. It would be recalled that despite affidavit evidence showing that the ADC had returned elected representatives, including three members from Kogi State, the trial court concluded that those members had defected to another political party, even though no evidence whatsoever of any such defection existed before the court,” Abdullahi stated.

The party recalled that the Attorney-General of the Federation, Chief Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, later became a party to the suit seeking the deregistration of the ADC and four other political parties, arguing that they no longer satisfied the constitutional requirements for continued recognition under Section 225A of the Constitution.

It added that the appellate court faulted the trial court’s interpretation of the constitutional provision, noting that although the lower court acknowledged the correct legal position, it nevertheless reached conclusions that were inconsistent with both the Constitution and the evidence before it.

“The Court of Appeal therefore concluded that the African Democratic Congress satisfies the constitutional threshold for recognition as a political party and remains fully entitled to continue its political activities under the Constitution and the Electoral Act,” the ADC added.

Describing the ruling as significant beyond the fortunes of the affected political parties, Abdullahi said it reaffirmed the principle that judicial authority must be exercised within the bounds of the law, in obedience to superior court orders and on the basis of evidence properly placed before the court.

He added: “We consider this judgment significant, not merely because it restores the rights of the affected political parties but because it reinforces an enduring constitutional principle: that judicial authority must always be exercised within the bounds of the law, in obedience to superior court orders, and on the basis of evidence properly before it.

“The ADC has always maintained its confidence in the judicial process. We are gratified that the Court of Appeal has reaffirmed the rule of law, corrected a grave miscarriage of justice, and protected the constitutional rights of political parties against unlawful interference.”

Abdullahi said the party would continue to strengthen its structures, deepen democratic participation and offer Nigerians what it described as a credible political alternative.