Tinubu Seeks to Ban ADC from Contesting 2027 Polls

The dramatic and unexpected move by the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Lateef Olasunkanmi Fagbemi (SAN), to support a suit seeking the deregistration of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and four other parties is, on its face, a tidy exercise in constitutional housekeeping. In practice, it looks rather more like an attempt to prune the political garden in a way that favors the incumbent gardener, President Bola Tinubu and the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). Although the case, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/25, has been adjourned to early May for hearing, one senior APC source who elected anonymity for obvious reasons, told Huhuonline.com that the decision by the AGF to join the suit came directly from Aso Rock. 

 

“Deregistration is not a minor administrative tweak; it is the political equivalent of capital punishment,” the source said, adding: “a party struck off the register is effectively erased from the electoral map. Its supporters are left politically homeless, its structures dismantled, its ambitions deferred and completely extinguished.” The source explained that the Presidency is becoming increasingly nervous over the rising profile of the ADC as an alternative to the APC and President Tinubu is leaving nothing to chance. The source noted that the presence of the ADC, even if it is unlikely to win, serves as a safety valve for dissent and a laboratory for repeating the playbook that brought the APC to power. Removing them wholesale, particularly on the eve of an election cycle, will narrow the political field in ways that will be easily managed.

 

Originally targeting only the ADC, the suit was later amended to include the Accord Party, Action People’s Party (APP), Zenith Labour Party (ZLP), and Action Alliance (AA). The legal action, filed by Hon. Igbokwe Raphael Nnanna, Chairman, Board of Trustees and National Coordinator of the National Forum of Former Legislators (NFFL), accused the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) of neglecting its constitutional duty by continuing to recognise parties that have allegedly failed to win any elective office or meet prescribed benchmarks since their registration. The NFFL is asking the Federal High Court in Abuja to compel INEC to deregister the affected parties over their alleged failure to meet constitutional performance thresholds. 

 

In a response filed on April 23, by his team of lawyers led by Prof J.O. Olatoke (SAN), the AGF supported the plaintiffs’ position, stating that enforcing constitutional compliance falls within his mandate as the chief law officer of the federation. He argued that INEC lacks the discretion to retain political parties that fail to meet requirements outlined in Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution. “Supporting legal action that seeks to enforce constitutional observance is an essential part of the mandate of the 2nd defendant…The continued existence of non-performing political parties will inflate ballots, burden public funds, complicate election administration and undermine constitutional intent,” the AGF said in his submission.

 

The plaintiffs contend that several registered parties have failed to win any elective office or secure at least 25 per cent of votes in any state during presidential elections; benchmarks required to maintain registration. They argue that allowing such parties to participate in elections undermines electoral efficiency and wastes public resources. However, the move has drawn scrutiny from political observers and stakeholders who warn of broader implications for Nigeria’s democratic landscape. The move has sparked fresh debate over the future of multi-party participation ahead of the 2027 general elections. Some analysts note that the ADC, in particular, has been involved in internal leadership disputes that previously reached the courts. The Supreme Court, in earlier rulings on party leadership tussles, has emphasized the autonomy of political parties in managing their internal affairs, while also reinforcing the need for adherence to constitutional provisions.

This is where suspicion creeps in. President Tinubu, a seasoned political operator, has long been associated with a style of politics that prizes consolidation. His supporters would call it discipline; his critics, domination. The AGF’s intervention, though legally framed, fits neatly into a broader narrative of centralization. A political landscape with fewer parties is, almost by definition, one that is easier to manage. Critics of the current suit argue that deregistering opposition parties, especially ahead of a major election cycle, could reduce political competition and limit voter choice. Others, however, maintain that enforcing constitutional thresholds is necessary to streamline the political space and ensure only viable parties remain active.

 

At the center of the debate is INEC, which has historically exercised caution in deregistering parties, often citing legal complexities and the need to uphold democratic pluralism. The commission has yet to formally respond to the latest suit. The case also comes amid ongoing discussions about electoral reforms and the structure of Nigeria’s party system, which currently includes dozens of registered parties. Previous attempts to reduce the number of parties have been met with mixed reactions, balancing concerns over administrative efficiency with the principle of inclusive political participation.

 

If the court rules in favor of the plaintiffs, the affected parties could be barred from participating in the 2027 general elections unless they meet constitutional requirements or successfully challenge the decision. Legal experts say the outcome of the case could set a significant precedent for how electoral laws are interpreted and enforced, particularly regarding party registration and performance standards.

As proceedings continue, the case is expected to remain a focal point in discussions about Nigeria’s democratic framework, electoral integrity, and the balance between regulation and political plurality.