Appeal Court Asked To Set Aside Order Compelling INEC To Register ADA

The crisis rocking the All Democratic Alliance (ADA) has deepened as the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal has been asked to set aside the order directing the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to register the association as a political party ahead of the 2027 general elections.

Naija News understands that the appeal was filed on Tuesday by an aggrieved member of the association, Dr Umar Ardo, who said he had earlier obtained the required access code from INEC before his bid to register ADA as a political party was rejected.

In the six grounds of appeal lodged before the appellate court, Ardo argued that Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court, Abuja, erred in law when he ordered INEC to release its access code to a faction of the association led by Chief Akin Ricketts.

Ardo alleged that Ricketts had earlier been removed as the Pro Tem National Chairman of the association and that his name had been expunged from ADA’s membership list.

Chief Ricketts and Dr Aminu Ahmed were listed as the first and second respondents, while INEC was cited as the third respondent.

The appellant argued that Justice Lifu wrongly held that the suit leading to the judgment was not statute-barred under Section 76 of the Electoral Act 2022.

He maintained that the case was filed on January 16, more than one month after the cause of action arose, contrary to the 14-day limitation period prescribed by the Electoral Act.

Ardo also claimed that the lower court failed to consider that there was already a pending suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2788/2025 between the same parties and over the same subject matter.

According to him, the fresh suit amounted to an abuse of court process because it sought the same relief — the registration of ADA as a political party.

“The appellant and some other members of ADA had earlier filed a suit seeking the same relief, registration of the All Democratic Alliance as a political party, a suit to which the 1st and 2nd respondents were also parties, and that suit is currently on appeal,” the appeal read.

“The subsequent filing of this suit by the 1st and 2nd respondents, seeking the same relief against the same defendant (INEC) in respect of the same subject matter, constitutes a classic abuse of court process.

“The doctrine of abuse of court process is designed to prevent multiplicity of actions, vexatious litigation, and the undermining of pending appeals.”

Ardo further alleged that the respondents were attempting to bypass the pending appeal by filing a fresh case before the Federal High Court.

“The lower court failed to consider that the 1st and 2nd respondents were effectively forum shopping and attempting to circumvent the appellate process by filing a fresh suit rather than awaiting the outcome of the appellant’s suit FHC/ABJ/CS/2788/2025,” he argued.

“The lower court’s refusal to recognise the abuse of process encourages duplication of judicial resources and creates the risk of conflicting judgments on the same subject matter.”

The appellant also faulted the court for allegedly failing to evaluate evidence that Ricketts had been removed from ADA’s leadership and was no longer a member of the association.

“The trial court erred in law and misdirected itself on the facts when it failed to evaluate and give due evidential weight to the evidence that the 1st respondent had been deposed as Pro Tem National Chairman of the All Democratic Alliance, and that his name was not on the association’s list of members, thereby leaving him without the requisite locus standi to maintain the action,” the appeal stated.

“A person who is not a member of an association, and who has been removed from its leadership, lacks the legal capacity to sue on behalf of that association.”

Internal Affairs Disputed

Ardo also argued that the Federal High Court lacked the jurisdiction to interfere in the internal affairs of the association, including its leadership changes.

“The denial of the registration of the appellant’s association is the subject of an appeal in CA/ABJ/CV/742/2026,” he stated.

“The order of the trial court directed the 3rd respondent to issue a new code to the 1st and 2nd respondents within 72 hours, and to reopen its portal to allow them to make a fresh application for the registration of ADA in the names of the 1st and 2nd respondents, who are not members of the ADA.

“In so doing, the trial court had set aside the association’s decisions on its own internal affairs — a matter over which the trial court lacks jurisdiction.”

He further argued that the lower court failed to properly evaluate the minutes of the association, which, according to him, contained decisions on the change of leadership.

Aside from asking the Appeal Court to nullify the judgment of the Federal High Court, Ardo also applied for costs against the respondents jointly and severally.

Background

Naija News reports that INEC had, in October 2025, disclosed that ADA was among 14 pre-qualified associations that applied for registration as political parties after completing the upload of required information and documentation.

Although the commission cleared ADA and seven other associations for the next stage of the registration process, members of the group later approached the court, alleging that the access code had been wrongly released to Ardo.

They claimed that Ardo was neither the Pro Tem National Chairman nor the Secretary of the association and asked the court to compel INEC to issue the access code to them.

The plaintiffs also asked the court to declare that INEC violated extant laws by issuing the access code to Ardo.

They further prayed the court to declare the information uploaded to INEC’s portal by Ardo on behalf of ADA illegal, unlawful, null and void.

In his judgment, Justice Lifu faulted INEC for releasing the access code to Ardo and declared the action illegal, wrongful, null and void.

The court ordered INEC to open its portal for one week to allow the plaintiffs to upload the required documents, including ADA’s membership register.

Justice Lifu also nullified all actions previously taken on behalf of the association by Ardo and directed INEC to issue the access code to the plaintiffs within 72 hours.