In a unanimous decision on Tuesday, a three-member panel led by Justice A. B. Mohammed condemned Justice Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja for flouting a May 22 order that directed him to suspend proceedings before him, describing his conduct as the gravest form of judicial misconduct.

“The decision of the lower court to proceed with the judgment despite the express order of this court is a brazen violation of the hierarchy of the court and the 1999 Constitution,” the panel held.

The appellate court went further, invoking a Supreme Court precedent to characterise Justice Lifu’s conduct in the harshest terms.

“The decision of the lower court to proceed with the judgment despite the express order of this court is the highest form of judicial impertinence,” the panel declared, adding that the Supreme Court had previously held that a judge who acted in such a manner “is unfit for the bench as it amounts to judicial rascality.”

The court said it had a duty to assert its supervisory authority over lower courts and protect the integrity of the judicial hierarchy.

“Courts are enjoined to protect their integrity. This court has supervisory authority over the trial court. This court has the duty to invoke its powers in ensuring that its orders are obeyed. The application for stay of execution is hereby granted. The enforcement of the judgment is stayed,” the panel ruled.

The Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Lifu, had on Monday ordered INEC to deregister the ADC, Accord Party, Action Alliance, Action Peoples Party and Zenith Labour Party, ruling that the five parties failed to meet the constitutional performance thresholds under Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution, specifically, requirements related to securing at least 25 per cent of votes in certain states or winning seats in the 2023 general elections.

Earlier in Tuesday’s proceedings, INEC told the appellate court it was stunned by Justice Lifu’s decision to deliver the judgment, disclosing that the commission only learned of the ruling through media reports rather than any official notification.

INEC’s lead counsel, Mr Haliru Mohammed, told the panel that the commission had been aware of the appellate court’s May 22 order restraining the lower court from delivering the judgment, which had originally been reserved for June 5.

“We were not aware of any notice from the court regarding the delivery of the judgment. We only saw it as breaking news in the media. We therefore do not oppose the application of the appellant to stay the execution of the judgment,” Mohammed submitted.

The commission also aligned itself with the notice of appeal filed by the affected political parties.

Counsel to the ADC, Mr Shuaibu Aruwa, SAN, told the court that Justice Lifu communicated the judgment’s delivery to the party via WhatsApp, a disclosure that drew visible reactions from the bench.

Aruwa described the lower court’s conduct as an invitation to anarchy and urged the appellate court to invoke its disciplinary jurisdiction under Section 6 of the 1999 Constitution to sanction the judge.

“The action of the trial judge calls for swift and extraordinary measures from this court. We have come to the stage where this court should press the reset button.

“We urge this court to take disciplinary steps by immediately suspending that judgment. This court has the power to protect its own integrity. We pray this court suspends the judgment immediately without further delay,” he added.

APC reacts

Reacting to the appellate court’s decision,  the ADC’s National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, said the ruling offered a measure of hope for the judiciary’s credibility, though he was careful not to celebrate unreservedly.

“It indicates that the judiciary may still redeem itself. We are cautiously delighted but we insist that it shouldn’t have happened in the first place,” Abdullahi said in a telephone interview.

He called on the National Judicial Council to take urgent steps to rid the bench of judges whose conduct brought the institution into disrepute.

“We, therefore, hope that the judicial council will take urgent steps to purge the bench of judges who bring the judicial institution to disrepute,” he said.

The National Leader of the Action Peoples Party, Ikenga Ugochinyere, was more emphatic in his welcome of the ruling, describing it as a vindication of the party’s position from the outset and calling on the NJC to weed out what he termed controversial judges.

“There was no need to panic in the first place, and, so, this ruling is a vindication of our position from the get-go,” Ugochinyere said.

“We call on the NJC to weed out controversial justices who say one thing in the morning and another in the evening. These are the bad eggs giving the judiciary a bad name,” he added.

Ugochinyere raised broader concerns about public confidence in the justice system, warning that judicial inconsistency was eroding citizens’ respect for court pronouncements.