The Court of Appeal in Abuja has dismissed an appeal filed by the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Senator David Mark, and Rauf Aregbesola.
The appeal sought to overturn a Federal High Court ruling that blocked them from dissolving the ADC’s State Working Committees. In a split decision of two justices to one, the appellate court rejected the appeal.
Additionally, in a split ruling delivered on Monday night, the court fined the State Chairmen 10 million Naira for violating the party’s constitution and terminating their four-year tenure.
Presiding Justice Abba Bello Mohammed issued the minority ruling, while Justices Okon Abang and Donatus Okorowo delivered the majority ruling.
Justices Abang and Okorowo both ruled that the Federal High Court was correct to assume jurisdiction over the case, as the removal of the state chairmen violated the ADC Constitution.
They concluded that because both the party’s constitution and Section 223 of the 1999 Constitution were breached, the appellants’ argument that the dispute was strictly an internal party affair could not stand.
They argued that allowing the appellants to violate their own party’s constitution would lead to chaos and threaten to undermine democracy.
Abba Bello Mohammed, the Presiding Justice, disagreed, arguing that the party’s internal affairs are solely responsible for the election and removal of officers.
According to Justice Mohammed, the ADC Constitution does not give the State Working Committee the exclusive power to set up a Congress Committee for choosing State Executive Committee officers.
Furthermore, Justice Mohammed ruled that, with the exception of the first respondent, the other six respondents did not disclose their status and interest to give them the legal standing (locus standi) required to file the lawsuit at the Federal High Court
The suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/58/2026.
Listed as defendants in the matter are the African Democratic Congress (ADC); Senator David Mark; Senator Patricia Akwashiki; Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi; Rauf Aregbesola; Prof. Oserheimen Osunbor, who is also sued on behalf of the Caretaker/Interim National Working Committee; and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
In an originating summons filed at the Federal High Court, the ADC state chairmen sought a judicial interpretation of the constitutional provisions governing the tenure and powers of party organs, particularly concerning the party’s leadership and planned state congresses.
The main issue in the conflict was if the four-year tenures of the ADC’s State Working Committee and State Executive Committee were still valid during the convening of a National Convention and the session of a fully established State Congress.
The plaintiffs based their primary arguments on Article 17 of the party’s constitution, Section 223 of the 1999 Constitution, and a Final Mediation Report dated December 23, 2023.
The court ruled that the appellants could not sustain their argument that the dispute was purely an internal party matter because it involved violations of both the party’s constitution and Section 223 of the 1999 Constitution.
Backstory…
This appellate court decision marks the latest turn in the ADC’s long-running internal leadership struggle, which has sparked numerous legal battles and rival bids for control over the party’s structure ahead of the 2027 general elections.
The dispute began after disagreements over the conduct of party congresses and the legitimacy of some state executives, with aggrieved members challenging the process in court and arguing that the congresses violated the party’s constitution.
The legal battle has since complicated the ADC’s efforts to strengthen its nationwide structure, particularly as it seeks to position itself as a major opposition platform ahead of the next elections.
Read Also: Court directs INEC to deregister ADC, Accord Party and three others
