Court filings obtained by Punch indicate that INEC rejected the application before the court, arguing that it does not satisfy the constitutional and legal conditions required for deregistering a political party.

The electoral body maintained that the authority to deregister political parties is strictly defined by law and cannot be applied arbitrarily or influenced by political considerations.

According to INEC, none of the constitutionally approved grounds for deregistration—such as failure to meet electoral performance benchmarks or violation of registration rules—had been established against the ADC.

The commission stated, “The power to deregister political parties is neither discretionary nor subject to political pressure, but strictly governed by extant laws and constitutional provisions.”

The filing has been viewed in some political and legal circles as a form of institutional resistance to what is perceived as attempts to manipulate the judiciary for partisan interests.

The suit in question seeks the deregistration of the ADC, Accord Party, Action People’s Party, Action Alliance, and Zenith Labour Party.

The Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Prince Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), is backing the case, arguing that inactive political parties overcrowd the electoral system and waste public resources, while urging enforcement of Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution.

Reacting, the Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication to former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, Phrank Shaibu, described the move as politically driven.

Shaibu said, “What we are witnessing is the unravelling of a poorly scripted political ambush designed to cripple opposition voices.”

He added that INEC’s stance confirms suspicions that the case lacks genuine legal grounding.

“The fact that INEC itself has come forward to puncture the legal vacuum of this application speaks volumes. It confirms what Nigerians already suspect, that this was never about law, but about intimidation,” he said.

Shaibu further cautioned against efforts to weaken political competition, stressing that democratic systems thrive on inclusion, not exclusion.

He said, “No democracy survives where the ruling party seeks to eliminate competition through the back door. Nigeria is bigger than any administration, and its democratic space cannot be shrunk to accommodate political insecurity.”

News reports that the case was filed by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC).

In his ruling on the defendants’ no-case submissions, Justice Rilwan Aikawa dismissed the application, holding that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against them.

The court ruled that, based on the evidence presented by the ICPC, the defendants have a case to answer and are required to enter their defence.

Saidu and Murktar are facing a four-count charge relating to alleged money laundering offences under the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

The ICPC alleged that Murktar, who served as a cashier in the Kaduna State Ministry of Finance at the time, made multiple cash withdrawals totaling ₦155 million from the Kaduna State Exchange Gain Account.

The commission further claimed that the funds were handed over in cash through a proxy for the benefit of Saidu, in violation of financial regulations.

It also alleged that the transactions were carried out outside the banking system and were suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activity.

The trial began after their arraignment on January 21, 2025, during which the prosecution called two witnesses and tendered several exhibits before closing its case.

The defendants, however, argued in their no-case submission that the prosecution’s evidence was insufficient to require them to open a defence.

The court rejected this argument, stating that the prosecution had presented enough evidence that required explanation from the defendants.

The case was adjourned to June 22, 2026, for the defendants to begin their defence.