A member of the Delta State House of Assembly and legal practitioner, Hon. Matthew Onojighofia Omonade, Esq., has dismissed widespread interpretations surrounding the recent Federal High Court judgment affecting the registration of the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC), insisting that the matter must be viewed strictly from a legal, rather than political or emotional, perspective.
In a detailed legal analysis released to the public, Omonade maintained that the decision of the Federal High Court sitting in Lokoja did not amount to judicial overreach but was a lawful exercise of the court’s inherent powers after discovering that an earlier judgment was obtained without joining a necessary party.
According to him, “Public discourse should be driven by facts and the law, not by misinformation, propaganda or sentiment. As lawyers, our duty is to explain the law as it is, not as we wish it to be.”
He explained that the original suit filed by the NDC against the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) predated reports linking prominent politicians to the party, stressing that the dispute solely revolved around INEC’s refusal to register the party over an alleged conflict involving its proposed logo.
Omonade noted that the Peace Movement Party (PMP), which claimed prior ownership of the disputed logo, was not joined in the original proceedings despite its direct interest in the matter.
“The court found that the earlier judgment was obtained without hearing a party whose legal rights were directly affected, thereby violating the constitutional right to fair hearing,” he stated.
Addressing criticisms that a court of coordinate jurisdiction lacked the authority to set aside an earlier judgment, the lawmaker described such arguments as legally unsustainable.
He argued that while the general principle discourages courts of equal status from reviewing each other’s decisions, well-established exceptions exist where judgments are procured through fraud, concealment of material facts, denial of fair hearing, or where fundamental procedural defects render the proceedings a nullity.
“The court did not sit on appeal over the earlier judgment,” Omonade said. “Rather, it exercised its inherent jurisdiction after finding that the proceedings which produced the judgment were fundamentally defective.”
He also dismissed claims that the application to set aside the judgment was incompetent because it was allegedly filed by a non-juristic person.
According to him, the application was properly instituted by Barrister Emmanuel Uzowuru in his personal capacity and as representative of the Peace Movement Party, adopting the same legal procedure previously used by the NDC when it instituted the original suit before it became a registered political party.
On the implications of the latest judgment, Omonade argued that although the court did not expressly order the deregistration of the NDC, setting aside the December 10, 2025 judgment effectively removed the legal foundation upon which INEC registered the party.
“The judgment of December 10 constituted the legal foundation upon which INEC proceeded to register the NDC. Once that judgment was set aside, the legal foundation for that registration ceased to exist,” he asserted.
He further explained that the substantive suit has now reverted to the stage it occupied before judgment was delivered, leaving the NDC in the position of an association seeking registration until the matter is finally determined by the court.
Invoking the celebrated legal maxim that “you cannot place something on nothing and expect it to stand,” Omonade maintained that every legal consequence flowing from the earlier judgment necessarily collapsed once that judgment was nullified.
While acknowledging the right of Nigerians to hold differing political opinions, the Delta legislator cautioned against what he described as deliberate distortion of judicial decisions for partisan advantage.
“The law is not determined by press conferences, television appearances or social media propaganda. It is determined by the Constitution, the evidence before the court and the orders made by the court,” he said.
He urged political actors and commentators to exercise restraint in their public comments, warning that misinformation surrounding judicial decisions could erode public confidence in the nation’s institutions.
Omonade concluded by expressing confidence that the legal process would ultimately determine the fate of the NDC, noting that unless overturned by the Court of Appeal, the Federal High Court’s determine the case based on the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as altered.
