As Nigeria approaches the 2027 general elections, stakeholders are urged to act responsibly and avoid sharp practices that could undermine electoral integrity. Recent judicial developments have sparked concerns, particularly two cases involving Justice Peter Lifu and Justice Isa H. Dashen.
Justice Peter Lifu and the Deregistration of Political Parties
In the Justice Peter Lifu case, the judge ordered the deregistration of five political parties—including the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and Accord Party (AP)—despite a prior Court of Appeal ruling that the suit should be put on hold. The Court of Appeal had ruled on May 22 that the case (Incorporated Trustees of NFFL vs. INEC & Ors) should be stayed. Justice Lifu ignored this, leading the Court of Appeal to accuse him of “brazenly violating the hierarchy of courts” and committing “the gravest form of judicial misconduct,” labeling it “judicial rascality.” The appeal has been adjourned to July 7.
Justice Lifu defended his decision, citing Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution and a National Judicial Council (NJC) circular from June 16, 2025, which directed that matters adjourned for judgment should not be transferred. He argued that without a specific order staying the judgment, he was obligated to deliver it. However, the Court of Appeal emphasized the principle of judicial hierarchy.
Justice Dashen and the NDC Registration Reversal
In a separate case, Justice Isa H. Dashen of the Federal High Court, Lokoja, overturned his own December 10, 2025 judgment that ordered INEC to register the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC). The court ruled that the earlier decision was constitutionally defective because the Peace Movement Party (PMP) was not joined, denying it a fair hearing. The court also noted that the NDC had allegedly stolen the PMP’s logo. The NDC leadership has appealed, arguing that the court acted as an appellate court over its own judgment, which is functus officio.
Legal experts point out that once a court delivers a final judgment, it cannot modify it unless exceptions apply, such as fraud or lack of jurisdiction. None of these exceptions were established in this case. The NDC claims the ruling is a miscarriage of justice and an abuse of court process.
Public Perception and the Risk of a One-Party State
These cases have fueled perceptions that the judiciary is compromised. Mr. Atedo Peterside wrote on X: “the cure for judicial rascality is disciplinary action. Glossing over rascality whilst relying on Appeal Courts alone to overturn obnoxious judgments encourages more judges to go into the lucrative business of delivering procurable obnoxious judgments.” This sentiment is echoed by many Nigerians, who fear the Tinubu administration may be orchestrating a one-party state. At least two presidential candidates claim there is a grand plan to stop them, while the ADC and Labour Party have expressed misgivings.
Reuben Abati, a former presidential spokesperson, argues that President Tinubu may not be directly interfering, but unscrupulous agents might be acting in his name. He calls on the President to leave institutions better than he met them and to allow democracy to thrive. The judiciary must be above reproach, and where misconduct is established, sanctions must be applied to sustain public trust and the rule of law.
