The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has demanded the immediate release of the certified true copy of a judgment delivered by Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court, accusing the court of withholding the document despite the payment of the required fees.
The party expressed displeasure over the delay, insisting that Justice Lifu had declared in open court that copies of the judgment were ready, yet lawyers who formally applied for the certified true copies (CTCs) had not received them.
In a statement signed by Phrank Shaibu, Director of Strategic Communication of the ADC Presidential Campaign Council, the party disclosed that counsel to the first defendant submitted a formal application for the certified judgment on November 6, 2026, and paid the assessed fee.
It added that counsel to the third defendant had also applied for the document a day earlier, on the day the judgment was delivered.
According to the ADC, both applications were duly acknowledged with the Federal High Court’s “PAID” stamp, indicating that all financial requirements had been met.
“This is an indefensible denial of access to a ruling that directly affects the party and its members. If the judgment was ready, there is no excuse for keeping it from the parties. Release it now,” the party said.
The ADC described the development as more than a routine administrative delay, arguing that withholding the certified judgment prevents affected parties from knowing the exact orders made by the court and pursuing appropriate legal remedies.
The party questioned why the document had not been released despite the judge’s declaration that it was ready and the applicants’ fulfilment of the necessary requirements.
It maintained that access to the certified judgment was essential for the parties to understand the court’s decision and exercise their legal rights, including challenging the ruling where necessary.
The party further argued that the judgment concerned the leadership of a major political party and the rights of its members, warning that continued withholding of the document could undermine public confidence in the judiciary.
The ADC also recalled that it had formally objected to Justice Lifu presiding over the matter, claiming that its National Secretary, Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola, had raised concerns about the judge’s impartiality.
According to the party, the concerns were based on previous appellate court decisions which, in its view, raised questions about the judge’s competence and neutrality.
It said the continued delay in releasing the judgment had further heightened those concerns and called for an explanation from the court.
The opposition party also questioned the timing of the judgment, noting that it was delivered days after the ADC launched its campaign in Sokoto State.
It alleged that the circumstances surrounding the judgment and the subsequent delay in releasing its certified copy raised questions about the process, particularly because the affected parties needed the document to determine their next legal steps.
“The public is entitled to ask whether this was a judicial process or a calculated attempt to deliver a political blow while denying the party the document needed to challenge it,” the statement added.
The ADC subsequently called on the Federal High Court to release the certified judgment without further delay and publicly explain why the applications, despite being paid for, had remained unattended.
It warned that it would pursue all lawful remedies, including taking the matter before appropriate authorities, to protect its interests and the rights of its members.
The party also insisted that it would not be intimidated or prevented from exercising its constitutional and legal rights to challenge the ruling.
“Justice must be done, its record must be accessible, and the consequences of denying the parties that access must not be evaded,” the statement concluded.
