BY John Odhe, YENAGOA
Mixed feelings are trailing the ruling by Justice Isah Dashen of the Federal High Court in Lokoja on Friday which nullified a December 2025 judgment that compelled the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to register the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC).
The court in its reversed judgement claimed that the initial ruling was constitutionally flawed for neglecting to include the Peace Movement Party (PMP), which contested the logo’s ownership.
Consequently, the court ordered a retrial of the substantive suit to ensure the participation of all relevant parties.
Reacting to the judgement, a lawyer and chairman of the Civil Liberties Organisations in Bayelsa State, Comrade David West described the situation as sad and tilting the country towards lack of opposition.
“Justice Dashen reversing himself; I don’t know if somebody somewhere is trying to use the court against the NDC.
“But in all, it’s not healthy for our democracy. NDC was registered as a party and INEC that registered the NDC did not go to court to say the registration of the NDC did not follow due process.
“Well, let this not be tactics for only the APC to present a presidential candidate in the 2027 election. To me, I am very much confused about this ruling that is coming from Justice Isah Dashen’s Court.”
He argued that it was strange to law for a a lower court’s judge to revert his earlier decision.
“Even if a judgement was delivered per incuriam, maybe the judge was not aware of certain issues, it is not the position of the judge to begin to revert himself. That should be a matter of the court of appeal to look at,” he asserted.
However, another legal practitioner, Barr. Ebibenabo Okorodas argued that a judge could reverse his earlier decision if the court found out that there was a hidden fraud.
“There are court precedents that when a judgement is delivered per incuriam, that’s in error, that error can be corrected.
“The only reason were a judgement can be reverted is when issue of fraud is raised.
“What is fraud? Fraud can be an issue of the court not knowing that there is a decision such as this but one of the parties had deceived him or fraudulently covered that position and made the judge to go ahead and give judgement,” he explained.
In the controversy surrounding the court ruling involving the NDC, the party’s National Secretary, Ikenna Enekweizu, rejected the decision and insisted that the court had already delivered a well-considered judgment ordering the registration of the NDC.
According to him, the NDC started the process of registering a political party in 2017 with an elephant as its logo. Along the line, the party realized another party already had the elephant as its logo, so it applied to INEC to change it and introduced the victory sign in 2024.
He said there was no problem until September 2025, when INEC wrote to the NDC saying it could not continue the registration process because, according to INEC, the NDC logo looked like that of the APC.
Enekweizu said the NDC disagreed with INEC and even requested to be allowed to change the logo so that the registration process could continue, but INEC refused. The party then took INEC to court.
He said at the time the case was filed, the NDC did not know anything about the Peace Movement Party (PMP). According to him, the only reason INEC gave for refusing registration was that the NDC logo looked like that of the APC.
He said INEC later introduced the issue of PMP during the court proceedings. However, he argued that PMP was not a registered political party and was not among the 171 political associations seeking registration in Nigeria.
According to him, when the judge asked INEC whether PMP was a registered political party, INEC answered “No.” When asked whether PMP was among the 171 associations seeking registration, INEC also answered “No.”
He said the court overruled all of INEC’s arguments, including the issue of PMP, and ordered that the NDC be registered.
Reacting to the latest ruling, Enekweizu insisted that there are only two legal grounds for setting aside a judgment: where the judgment is a nullity from the beginning or where it was obtained by fraud. He maintained that neither of those conditions applies in the NDC case.
He questioned why PMP, which claimed INEC refused to register it in 2015, stayed away for about nine years before coming to challenge the judgment.
“Every Nigerian knows there is foul play,” he said, insisting that PMP should have applied for leave to appeal as an interested party instead of asking the same court to set aside its own final judgment.
He also maintained that once a judge has heard and concluded a case, the judge becomes functus officio and has no power to reopen or rehear the matter.
