Court sets aside judgment directing INEC to register NDC

A federal high court in Lokoja, Kogi state, has set aside the earlier judgment made against the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) for failing to register the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) as a political party.

In delivering the judgment on Friday, the Justice Isah Dashen stated that the court’s judgment of December 10, 2025 negatively impacted the rights of the Peace Movement Party (PMP) which was not brought in as a party to the suit although it claimed to be the owner of the logo used in making the judgment.

He further ruled that all parties should be reinstated to their initial positions prior to the judgment of December 10, 2025 and further asked the parties involved to join all other parties in order to be able to completely determine the issues raised in the suit.

Counsel to the Peace Movement Party, C.S. Ekeocha, told media houses that the party petitioned the court due to the fact that the judgment to register NDC was made using a logo owned by the peace movement party before filing the suit.

Ekeocha added that the court was persuaded to agree that the rights of the party were infringed and therefore cancelled the judgment.

“The court has ordered all parties to return to the position they occupied before the judgment of December 10, 2025, and directed the claimants to join all necessary parties to ensure the issues in dispute are effectually and completely determined,” Ekeocha said.

He explained that the implication of the ruling is that every action taken by INEC in compliance with the now-vacated judgment stands reversed.

“The recognition of the Nigeria Democratic Congress, the issuance of its certificate of registration, its inclusion in INEC’s records, and any appearance on ballot papers arising from that judgment must be withdrawn pending the final determination of the substantive suit,” he added.

Ekeocha, however, clarified that the substantive case remains before the court.

“The matter has not been concluded.

The court merely set aside its previous judgment and directed that the party whose interests were affected be joined so that all sides can be heard before a fresh decision is reached,” he said.

He also dismissed suggestions that the court merely ordered parties to maintain the status quo, insisting that the ruling specifically directed a restoration of the position that existed before the December 10, 2025 judgment.