*As Ugochinyere, Chima Amadi Face Political Uncertainty
The Federal High Court in Owerri has fixed February 26, 2026, for the hearing of the landmark suit filed by Mazi Franklin Ngoforo of the Civic Action for Democracy (CAD) seeking to compel the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to delist the allegedly deregistered Action Peoples Party from its database of registered political parties. The date, announced on Thursday following the court’s receipt and processing of the suit numbered FHC/CS/03/2026, sets the stage for what legal observers are describing as one of the most consequential pre-election cases in Nigeria’s democratic history, with far-reaching implications for the 2027 general elections and the political futures of several prominent politicians who have committed to the APP platform.
The scheduled hearing date has intensified the political crisis engulfing Hon. Ikenga Imo Ugochinyere, the federal lawmaker representing Ideato constituency in the House of Representatives, and Mazi Chima Amadi, a governorship aspirant in Imo State, both of whom have publicly declared their intentions to seek re-election and election respectively on the APP ticket in 2027. Political sources close to both politicians indicate that the February 26 court date has thrown their camps into unprecedented confusion and anxiety, with supporters in disarray and potential political allies distancing themselves from what increasingly appears to be a sinking ship. The hearing date, coming just over a month from now and barely a year before the 2027 electoral cycle intensifies, leaves little room for legal maneuvering or delay tactics that might have benefited the embattled party.
At the heart of the case are twenty-one distinct reliefs that CAD is seeking from the Federal High Court, including declarations that APP was lawfully deregistered on February 6, 2020, that INEC’s claim of a restraining court order is false and constitutes fraud, perpetual injunctions restraining both INEC from recognizing APP and restraining APP from participating in any electoral process, and orders of mandamus compelling INEC to immediately remove APP from its register. CAD Executive Director Mazi Franklin Ngoforo, speaking at the world press conference that followed the filing of the suit on January 20, 2025, characterized the legal action as “the most comprehensive, meticulously researched, and legally flawless challenge to electoral corruption in Nigeria’s democratic history,” emphasizing that “what we have filed today is not merely a legal action; it is a battle for the soul of Nigerian democracy.”
The case rests on what Ngoforo described as “five unassailable pillars of legal argument” that form the foundation of CAD’s challenge. First, that APP was lawfully deregistered by INEC on February 6, 2020, pursuant to constitutional and statutory provisions, and that this deregistration was conclusively affirmed by the Supreme Court of Nigeria in March 2022 in a final and binding judgment. Second, that INEC’s claim that APP obtained an interim court order restraining its deregistration is “demonstrably, verifiably, and incontrovertibly false” as evidenced by the commission’s failure to produce any such order despite requests spanning more than five years. Third, that even if such an order had been granted, “the notion of an interim injunction remaining operative for six years without renewal or extension constitutes a legal impossibility under Nigerian law and an insult to our entire judicial system.” Fourth, that APP’s participation in elections after its deregistration, including its acquisition of a councillorship seat in Jigawa State in October 2024, “cannot cure the fundamental nullity of its non-existence as a registered political party.” And fifth, that INEC has a mandatory constitutional and statutory obligation to remove APP from its register, and that courts have both jurisdiction and duty to compel this through orders of mandamus.
The documentary evidence that will be presented to the court on February 26 is described by legal analysts as overwhelming and potentially insurmountable for APP and INEC to challenge. CAD has exhibited INEC’s own Notice of Deregistration dated February 6, 2020, listing APP among seventy-four deregistered parties; the Supreme Court judgment of March 2022 affirming the constitutional validity of that deregistration exercise; correspondence from Barr. Mrs. Eunice Atuejide dated July 29, 2020, requesting details of the alleged court order, a letter that has remained unanswered for more than five years; correspondence from Barr. Ukpai Ukairo in 2024 raising similar concerns which INEC similarly ignored; APP’s own constitution and manifesto; evidence of APP’s illegal participation in Rivers State and Jigawa State local government elections; INEC’s current register showing APP still listed as a registered party despite its deregistration; and the full text of CAD’s December 12, 2025 world press conference that first publicly exposed the alleged conspiracy. Each exhibit has been presented as a certified true copy, properly authenticated and admissible under the Evidence Act.
Adding to the immediate threat facing APP is CAD’s Motion on Notice for interlocutory injunction, which will also be heard on February 26 and seeks urgent interim relief to prevent APP from participating in any electoral activities pending the full determination of the substantive case. This application requests that the court immediately restrain INEC from recognizing APP, from accepting its nomination forms, from including it in any electoral materials, and from according it any status as a political party, while simultaneously restraining APP itself from holding itself out as a registered party, from fielding candidates, from participating in elections, and from engaging in any activities reserved for legitimate political parties. If granted, and legal experts suggest the probability is high given the strength of CAD’s evidence, this interlocutory injunction would effectively terminate APP’s ability to participate in the 2027 electoral cycle regardless of how long the substantive case takes to reach final judgment, leaving politicians like Ugochinyere and Amadi scrambling for alternative political platforms with less than thirteen months to the elections.
The temporal dynamics of the February 26 hearing date create enormous pressure on all parties involved and virtually eliminate the possibility of delay tactics that might otherwise benefit APP. With the 2027 general elections now barely thirteen months away, political parties are already beginning preparations for primaries, candidate selection, and nomination processes. Ngoforo emphasized this urgency in his press conference remarks: “If APP is allowed to field candidates for these elections, if a deregistered entity is permitted to present candidates for the presidency, National Assembly, governorships, and state houses of assembly, the entire electoral process will be fatally compromised from inception. We cannot wait until after the elections to address this illegality, because by then the damage will be irreparable.” He warned that a post-election challenge based on the participation of an illegal party could lead to the nullification of the entire 2027 general elections, plunging Nigeria into unprecedented constitutional crisis, a scenario that CAD is determined to prevent through timely judicial intervention.
The implications of the February 26 hearing extend far beyond the immediate parties to the suit, touching fundamental questions about institutional integrity, constitutional governance, and the credibility of Nigeria’s electoral system. Ngoforo posed these questions starkly: “How can INEC, a body established by our Constitution and charged with organizing credible elections, manufacture a non-existent court order to shield a failed political party from lawful consequences? How can INEC officials look Nigerian citizens in the eye and claim they have been restrained by a court for six years when no such restraint exists and when Nigerian law makes such a restraint impossible? How can INEC continue to recognize a political party that the Supreme Court has confirmed was lawfully deregistered, thereby placing itself in direct defiance of the apex court’s binding judgment? How can we entrust the conduct of the 2027 general elections to an institution that has demonstrated such brazen disregard for constitutional provisions, statutory requirements, and judicial decisions?”
For Ugochinyere and Amadi, the February 26 hearing represents a political crossroads that could determine whether their 2027 ambitions survive or collapse. Sources within APP indicate that both politicians have been frantically consulting with lawyers and political strategists, exploring possible defenses and contingency plans should the court rule against the party. However, political observers note that with the weight of evidence arrayed against APP, including INEC’s own deregistration notice, the Supreme Court’s affirmation, and the conspicuous absence of any court order to support INEC’s retention of the party, the prospects for a favorable outcome appear dim. Some political analysts have begun speculating that Ugochinyere and Amadi may be forced to seek alternative platforms before the court delivers its judgment, though any such move would represent a humiliating reversal for politicians who have publicly and repeatedly committed themselves to APP as their vehicle for the 2027 elections.
As the February 26 hearing date approaches, all eyes will be on the Federal High Court in Owerri and the judge assigned to hear what Ngoforo described as a case that “will define your legacy and will determine whether our judiciary can stand as the last bulwark against institutional corruption and electoral manipulation.” The CAD executive director appealed directly to the judiciary: “The facts before you are clear, the law is unambiguous, and the public interest demands decisive action. We are not asking you to do anything extraordinary or controversial; we are simply asking you to enforce the Constitution, apply the Electoral Act as written, give effect to the binding decision of the Supreme Court, and compel a constitutional body to perform its mandatory duty.” With comprehensive documentary evidence, binding Supreme Court precedent, and the approaching 2027 elections creating urgency for resolution, the February 26 hearing promises to be a watershed moment for Nigerian democracy, electoral integrity, and the political futures of those who have staked everything on the embattled Action Peoples Party.
