The National Chairman and presidential candidate of the Zenith Labour Party (ZLP), Dan Nwanyanwu, has criticised the Federal High Court ruling ordering the deregistration of his party and four others, describing the judgment as a miscarriage of justice that could expose alleged irregularities within the judicial system.
Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court, Abuja, on Monday directed the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Accord Party, Zenith Labour Party (ZLP) and other affected political parties over alleged constitutional violations.
The ruling followed a suit instituted by a group of former lawmakers seeking the deregistration of the parties.
The judgment, if upheld, could have significant political implications, including affecting the political platforms of key figures such as former Vice President and ADC presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar, as well as Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke ahead of future elections.
However, the Court of Appeal had earlier ordered a stay of proceedings in the matter. Despite the subsisting order, Justice Lifu proceeded to deliver judgment after summoning parties to court.
Reacting during an interview on Arise News, Nwanyanwu condemned the development, arguing that the trial court acted in defiance of the appellate court’s directive.
“What happened today is a travesty of justice. It is something that should never be accommodated within legal practice,” he said.
According to him, the Court of Appeal had already stayed proceedings in the case, preventing any further action by the lower court. He recalled that Justice Lifu had initially been unable to deliver judgment earlier in the month after becoming aware of the appellate court’s order.
Nwanyanwu further claimed that notices were issued to parties on Monday morning directing them to appear in court, where the judgment was subsequently delivered.
He questioned the respect for the hierarchy of courts, alleging that Justice Lifu was fully aware of the pending appeal and the Court of Appeal’s directive but chose to proceed regardless.
