Renowned public affairs commentator and professor of journalism, Farooq Kperogi, has launched a scathing attack on the Federal High Court judgment ordering the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister the African Democratic Congress (ADC), describing the ruling as “pure judicial banditry” and a grave threat to Nigeria’s democratic future.
Reacting to the judgment in a statement on Monday, Kperogi argued that the court’s decision was impossible to interpret as anything other than a politically motivated assault on democratic pluralism.
“Today’s Federal High Court judgment ordering INEC to deregister the African Democratic Congress is difficult to understand as anything other than politically engineered judicial violence against democratic pluralism,” he stated.
Kperogi challenged the legal basis reportedly relied upon by the court, which held that the ADC failed to meet the constitutional requirements for continued registration as a political party.
According to him, available electoral records contradict that claim.
“The reported reason for the judgment is that the ADC failed to meet the constitutional threshold for continued registration as a political party. But that is plainly false,” he said.
Citing results from the 2023 general elections, Kperogi noted that the ADC secured two seats in the House of Representatives in Kogi State, representing Ijumu/Kabba Bunu and Yagba East/Yagba West/Mopa Muro federal constituencies, in addition to winning a seat in the Kogi State House of Assembly.
“This is all in INEC’s public record,” he stressed.
Referencing Section 225A of the Constitution, the academic maintained that a political party can only be deregistered if it fails to secure the minimum electoral foothold prescribed by law.
“Section 225A of the Constitution permits deregistration only when a party fails to win the required electoral foothold, including at least one seat in the National Assembly or a State House of Assembly. The ADC met that requirement. A judgment that says otherwise is pure judicial banditry,” he declared.
Kperogi further dismissed arguments that the subsequent defection of elected ADC lawmakers could justify the party’s deregistration, insisting that electoral victories remain valid regardless of post-election political movements.
“Even if some ADC elected officials later defected to other parties, that does not cancel the fact that they were elected on the ADC platform in 2023. Defection is not retroactive electoral defeat. A party that won seats cannot be treated as a party that won none,” he argued.
He added that if defections away from the party were to be considered, then defections into the ADC should equally count in its favour.
“Plus, if defection from the party counts against it, defections into it should compensate for defections from it. There are at least 25 federal legislators (Senate and House of Representatives) who have defected to the ADC in the current realignment cycle. Some people say the figure is higher than that,” he stated.
The columnist warned that the implications of the ruling extend far beyond the fate of the ADC, suggesting that it could undermine confidence in Nigeria’s democratic institutions and electoral process.
“To deregister a party on a ground contradicted by official election records creates the strong impression that the judiciary is being used to do what political actors fear voters may not do,” he said.
He cautioned that allowing courts to remove political parties from the ballot despite evidence to the contrary would fundamentally alter the democratic process.
“The danger is larger than the ADC. If courts can erase parties from the ballot on claims that are refuted by INEC’s records, then elections cease to be contests among citizens and become permissions granted by judges,” Kperogi warned.
According to him, such a precedent would strike at the heart of Nigeria’s multi-party democracy.
“That is a direct threat to party pluralism, voter choice and what remains of public confidence in Nigeria’s democracy,” he added.
