Lateef Fagbemi has explained why he believes the African Democratic Congress and three other political parties should face deregistration. His remarks, which were reported by Vanguard on Thursday, April 30, 2026, have continued to generate debate within Nigeria’s political and legal circles.
According to the Attorney General, the continued operation of political parties that fail to meet constitutional expectations places unnecessary pressure on the nation’s electoral system. He argued that having too many inactive or underperforming parties on the ballot increases the complexity of elections and creates avoidable financial burdens for the government.
Fagbemi’s comments followed widespread reactions to a recent judgment delivered by Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court in Abuja. The ruling sparked controversy, with the ADC alleging that outside influences may have played a role in the court’s decision. Despite the criticism, the Attorney General defended the position supporting deregistration and emphasized the need to uphold constitutional provisions guiding political parties in Nigeria.
The senior legal officer further stated that maintaining political parties that are not fully compliant with legal requirements could make election management more difficult for relevant authorities. According to him, the country’s electoral process should be streamlined in a way that promotes efficiency, reduces costs, and aligns with the intentions of the Constitution.
In his remarks, Fagbemi stressed that the existence of non-performing political parties contributes to larger ballot papers, places additional strain on public resources, and complicates election administration. He maintained that such developments run contrary to the purpose of Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution.
His position has since attracted mixed reactions from Nigerians, with some agreeing that reducing inactive parties could strengthen the electoral system, while others argued that the judiciary and government should avoid interfering in the internal affairs of political organizations. Several commentators also referenced previous Supreme Court positions supporting limited judicial interference in party matters.