By Chibuike Nwabuko
ABUJA (PRECISE POST) – Legal practitioner, Ekene Aninze, has said recent judicial decisions involving the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and the National Democratic Congress (NDC) deserve to be remembered in the history of Nigeria’s democracy.
Aninze, who to his X handle on Sunday, said the decisions by two different appellate court panels had come at critical moments when the fate of opposition political parties appeared to be hanging in the balance.
According to him, Justice Abba Mohammed of the Court of Appeal played a significant role in the legal battle over the status of the ADC, Accord and three other political parties after Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court had ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister the parties.
Aninze noted that Justice Mohammed led the Court of Appeal panel that initially stayed the execution of Justice Lifu’s judgment and subsequently, in July, set the judgment aside.
He also cited a recent case involving the NDC, noting that Justice Isah Dashen of the Federal High Court had earlier ordered INEC to register the party as a political party.
However, he said Justice Dashen subsequently revisited the matter following another application and effectively set aside his earlier decision.
Aninze said it was Justice Mohammed Danjuma who presided over the Court of Appeal panel that, in a 2–1 decision, set aside Justice Dashen’s subsequent judgment.
The lawyer said the two cases raised broader questions about the role of the judiciary in protecting multiparty participation and maintaining the hierarchy of courts.
“Whatever one’s political affiliation may be, these two cases raise an important point about the role of the judiciary in protecting multiparty participation and maintaining the hierarchy of courts,” he said.
Aninze, however, said he had not conducted sufficient research into the complete body of judgments delivered by the two judges to make a comprehensive assessment of their judicial records.
He nevertheless suggested that their previous decisions could merit further examination.
“I have not researched deeply enough to know the full body of judgments delivered by these two Justices in the past, but I believe there are certainly other decisions in their archives that deserve serious examination,” he said.
He further observed that judges who deliver consequential decisions at critical political moments often face an unusual trajectory within Nigeria’s electoral judicial system.
“One thing about Nigeria is that it’s always hard for judges who make decisions of this nature at critical moments to find their way sitting over Presidential Election Petition panels,” Aninze added.
