PARTY politics is a step away from implosion in Nigeria. And, tensions are high again over the ruling of the Federal High Court, Abuja, deregistering five opposition political parties despite a stay of execution order of the Court of Appeal in the matter. This is not only an open invitation to political chaos but also an indication of insubordination in the Temple of Justice. It must change.
On June 15, a judge, Peter Lifu, defied a May 22 order of stay of execution by the Court of Appeal, which had stopped the FHC from delivering its reserved ruling slated for June 5, and proceeded to hear the matter.
Lifu ordered INEC to deregister the Accord Party, Action Alliance, Action Peoples Party, African Democratic Congress, and Zenith Labour Party for failing to meet constitutional thresholds for the registration of political parties.
The case was brought before him by the National Forum of Former Legislators.
Lifu upheld the position of the litigants that the five political parties failed to meet electoral performance thresholds prescribed under Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution, the Electoral Act 2022 and INEC regulations.
The NFFL holds that, following the consistent failure of the political parties to score 25 per cent of votes in the 2023 general elections and subsequent elections, allowing the political parties to participate in the 2027 elections would undermine the integrity of the electoral system and violate the 1999 Constitution.
Section 225 A-C of the 1999 Constitution empowers INEC to deregister a political party for not winning at least 25 per cent of votes cast in a state in a presidential election, or one local government of a state in a governorship election.
By extension, a party must win at least one ward in the chairmanship election, one seat in the National or State House of Assembly election, or one seat in the councillorship election, or cease to be on the INEC register.
But that misses the big picture. The point at issue is the order of a superior court, indeed, a supervisory court, stopping the Federal High Court from pronouncing judgement in view of the pendency of the case before it (the superior court).
This high court ruling is therefore curious, mischievous, unprofessional, and a gross abuse of the judicial process. The judiciary must rein in this act of insubordination and insensitivity in the electoral process.
If not addressed, this will set a dangerous precedent. Therefore, the National Judicial Council must investigate the matter comprehensively. Whose interest is the judge serving, especially under a politically-charged atmosphere?
The judgement is capable of heating the polity further. Besides, it has serious implications for party and electoral dynamics and felicity, disrupting the electoral process.
If the ruling stands, it will be seen as a calculated exclusion of the strong opposition candidates, particularly former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar of the ADC and Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke of Accord.
Undoubtedly, this narrows the field of contestants, an advantage for President Bola Tinubu of the APC and the APC governorship candidate in Osun State.
This is a huge concern in a polity where there is already a strong perception that the country is drifting towards a one-party state.
It is capable of giving vent to the strong accusation by the opposition and the steely perception by the public that the APC is behind the gale of defections of the opposition politicians to its fold.
There is ample legal and governance wisdom in the Court of Appeal’s decision to order a stay of execution, which was profound: to enable the higher court to hear and adjudicate in the suit slated for June 25; and to avert needless anxiety and confusion in the off-cycle and by-election elections.
Thankfully, INEC has approached the Court of Appeal to ask for a stay of the action on the deregistration order stamped on it by the lower court.
The insertion of Section 225 A-C in the Constitution serves no useful purpose in the first place. A political party can be established solely to fight environmental degradation and other narrow issues.
In other democracies, people form political parties to fight against environmental degradation, abortion rights or anything else.
The inability to win 25 per cent in an election or win one seat cannot be a good reason to deregister a political party.
The deregistration of parties for their failure to win a seat in an election is outlandish. Developed democracies are moving towards independent candidacy. So, this section should be expunged from the Constitution.
The Court of Appeal order may have temporarily averted confusion, but the future is uncertain for the opposition parties.
So, there should therefore be a clear court pronouncement setting aside Section 225A-C in the overriding public interest.
Without a doubt, the framers of the Constitution legislated the deregistration of political parties to limit the number of political parties and costs, as the parties statutorily collect money from the government in Nigeria. This anomaly must stop.
Political parties should raise their own funds and sponsor their own parties and programmes. This is the only way to avoid government influence and unnecessary control.
In Spain, football clubs like Real Madrid and Barcelona raise funds from membership subscriptions. So, it is not unusual for political party members to pay dues to run parties.
To prevent moneybags from hijacking parties, the law should cap donations by members and groups.