…Says Development Centres key to taking government policies, projects to communities

Enugu State Governor, Dr. Peter Mbah, has inaugurated the newly appointed 68 Development Centre Administrators and members across the state, charging them to prioritise grassroots governance and ensure effective communication of government policies and projects across the state.

Speaking at the swearing-in ceremony at the International Conference Centre, Enugu, on Thursday, Mbah reminded the appointees that the oath of office constituted a social contract and a commitment to serve with integrity.

He said the Development Centres remained a critical component of his administration’s governance model because they represented the closest tier of government engagement with the people.

“Government is about the people, and we do not have an arm of government that is closer to the people than the Development Centres,” he said.

Mbah explained that the appointees were expected to take government policies, programmes and projects closer to communities, particularly women, families and other grassroots populations, while complementing rather than replacing the statutory responsibilities of local governments.

He urged them to work closely with their respective local government chairmen to ensure that government interventions and development initiatives reached their intended beneficiaries.

The governor further tasked the 68
Administrators with understanding government policies at both state and local government levels and effectively communicating their benefits to residents, especially those in rural communities.

Using the administration’s investments in Smart Green Schools and Type 2 Primary Healthcare Centres as examples, Mbah said the appointees should go beyond merely announcing government projects to explaining their practical benefits to the people.

He charged them to educate communities on how the modern healthcare facilities would reduce maternal and child mortality, ensure timely childhood immunisation and improve access to essential healthcare services.

He also urged them to sensitise residents on government interventions in water supply, sanitation and the campaign to make Enugu an open-defecation-free state.

“I want you to carry the energy and zest I see in you to our communities. Carry the energy to your various homes and communities,” he charged them.

On the political front, Mbah urged the appointees to communicate the administration’s achievements and policies to the electorate, challenging opposition politicians to present their programmes and records in governance.

He also disclosed that the administration would take its campaign and performance assessment engagements to the various Development Centres to showcase projects and achievements across communities and wards.

“Our campaign is going to be at the different Development Centres. We are going to go to all our Development Centres to point out to Ndi Enugu what we have done, not just at the Development Centre level, but even at the wards and our communities,” he said.

The governor reaffirmed his administration’s commitment to its 10,000-kilometre road development target, adding that significant progress had also been recorded in tourism, transportation and other sectors.

He expressed satisfaction with his administration’s payment of gratuities to retired workers, noting that the intervention was being implemented at both state and local government levels.

Earlier, the Special Adviser to the Governor on Political Matters, Chief Frank Anioma, described the inauguration as another demonstration of Mbah’s commitment to effective grassroots administration and development.

He charged the appointees to mobilise grassroot support for the governor’s re-election bid in their respective.

Responding on behalf of the appointees, an Administrator from Enugu North, Kenechukwu Ikenegbu, expressed appreciation to the governor for the appointments and pledged their commitment to advancing the administration’s development agenda at the grassroots.

He said the appointees would serve as the governor’s representatives in their respective communities, taking the administration’s achievements to residents through sustained engagement and door-to-door mobilisation.

Ikenegbu also pledged their support for the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its candidates in the forthcoming elections, assuring that they would intensify grassroots mobilisation across the state.

Speaking to newsmen, the Administrator, Nkanu East South Development Centre, Hon. Emmanuel Edeh, enthused that with over 10,000 verifiable milestones, Mbah had given the appointees so much to campaign on.

The swearing-in conducted by the State Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Barr. Osinachi Nnajieze, was witnessed by party leaders, members, and other stakeholders, including: the Minister of Innovation Science and Technology Dr Kingsley Udeh, the Speaker of the State House of Assembly, Rt. Hon. Uche Ugwu, the State Chairman of APC, Dr. Martin Chukwunwike, Secretary to the State Government, Professor Chidiebere Onyia, local government chairmen and members of the state executive council.

By Tony Edike

Several retired civil servants in Enugu State have expressed profound gratitude to Governor Peter Mbah following the payment of their long-awaited retirement gratuities, which had remained unpaid for years under previous administrations.

The retirees, some of whom had waited for more than two decades after leaving service, described the ongoing payment exercise as a dream come true, saying they had almost lost hope of receiving their entitlements while still alive.

They spoke during the ongoing disbursement of gratuity arrears by the Mbah administration, which inherited a huge backlog of unpaid retirement benefits from previous governments.

One of the beneficiaries, Mr. Luke Obi Ezea, who retired in 2014 after 35 years in service, said he had resigned himself to fate after waiting for years without receiving his gratuity.

Ezea said he had continued praying to God to keep him alive long enough to receive his retirement benefits, expressing joy that his prayers had finally been answered under the Mbah administration.

“I had lost hope of receiving my gratuity, hence I left everything to God. But I kept praying that I would be alive to receive it. God has answered my prayers as Governor Mbah has come to our rescue,” he said.

Describing the payment as a dream come true, Ezea praised the governor for fulfilling his promise to retirees, describing him as a man of his word and an action-oriented leader.

Another beneficiary, who also expressed appreciation to the state government, said the prolonged delay in receiving his gratuity had subjected retirees to terrible experiences and financial difficulties.

He, however, noted that the situation had changed since Mbah assumed office, particularly commending the governor for ensuring that monthly pension payments were up to date.

According to him, previous administrations often owed pensioners several months of their monthly entitlements, leaving many struggling to meet their basic needs.

“Today, I thank God that we have an amiable governor, a listening governor. Today, I am rejoicing because I have received my gratuity. Governor Mbah is also not owing monthly pension. He is up to date,” he said.

He added that the governor’s intervention had restored hope and brought smiles to retired civil servants and their families, praying for God’s protection and continued blessings upon him.

Also, Mrs. Christiana Emehelu narrated the emotional experience of her family, saying her husband, who retired in 2013, had yet to receive his gratuity and was currently in poor health.

She explained that when the family heard that the state government had commenced payment of outstanding retirement benefits, her husband immediately asked her to visit the relevant government office to confirm whether his gratuity was ready.

Mrs Emehelu

According to her, her husband had previously feared that he might not live long enough to enjoy the benefits of his years of service.

“When we heard the news that pension is being paid, he asked me to hastily go to the office to collect his pension. He said his expectation to collect his gratuity while alive had become a reality,” she said.

Emehelu said she was overwhelmed with joy when she arrived at the office and discovered that her husband’s name was among the beneficiaries.

She expressed appreciation to God and Governor Mbah for remembering her family after years of waiting, adding that only God could adequately reward the governor for the gesture.

The reactions underscore the emotional and financial implications of the prolonged non-payment of gratuities on retired civil servants, many of whom spent decades in public service but were unable to access their retirement entitlements for years after leaving office.

The Mbah administration has commenced the clearance of the inherited gratuity backlog as part of efforts to fulfil its commitment to retirees and restore confidence in the state’s pension administration.

The ongoing exercise has brought relief to beneficiaries and their families, some of whom had waited for more than 20 years for payments that represent their legitimate entitlements after years of service to Enugu State.

The political landscape has been thrown into fresh turbulence after the Federal High Court delivered a judgment by Justice Peter Lifu that voided the leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) under Senator David Mark and nullified Atiku Abubakar’s presidential candidacy for the 2027 elections.

Here are 10 key things to know about the judgment, the events that led to it, and the underlying political battles.

1. The Core Ruling and Immediate Casualties

Justice Peter Lifu’s judgment nullified the leadership of the Senator David Mark-led National Working Committee (NWC) of the ADC. Alongside sacking the party leadership, the court invalidated the primary elections conducted under their watch, effectively stripping Atiku Abubakar of his 2027 presidential nomination and nullifying the candidacies of other party flagbearers.

*2. Triggered by the North-East Zonal Leadership Dispute*

The legal onslaught against the Mark-led leadership began with a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, filed by Nafiu Bala Gombe, the former ADC National Deputy Chairman (North-East). Gombe challenged the legitimacy of the transition process that installed the new leadership after the resignation of the former National Chairman, Chief Ralph Nwosu.

3. The “Haphazard” Takeover by the Atiku Camp

The crisis began with a sudden, intense political realignment that saw the Atiku camp sweep into the ADC. Critics and aggrieved party stalwarts described the influx as a “haphazard takeover,” arguing that political heavyweights hijacked the party’s structures overnight, brushed aside internal party mechanisms, and sidelined foundational stakeholders who had built the platform over the years.

4. The Fierce Battle for Party Control

The takeover triggered an internecine war for the soul and structure of the ADC. Factional leaders and aggrieved members — such as Nafiu Bala Gombe — argued that the installation of Senator David Mark, Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola (as National Secretary), and other caretaker committee members blatantly violated the party’s constitution and provisions of the Electoral Act. This internal friction morphed into a fierce proxy war over who legitimately controlled the party apparatus.

5. Escalation of Interlocutory Issues to the Supreme Court

As the battle for control intensified, factions rushed to court, triggering a flurry of interlocutory injunctions, counter-injunctions, and appeals. These interlocutory battles moved swiftly through the court hierarchy, eventually landing on the Supreme Court docket as camps sought interim legitimacy or tried to block opponents from running party affairs.

6. The Trial Court Remand Order

At a previous stage of the protracted legal tussle, appellate reviews and procedural assessments led to orders directing parties back to the trial court. Rather than resolving the substantive issues at the appellate level immediately, higher courts returned the matter to the Federal High Court for a proper trial and determination of the core substantive claims regarding leadership rights and structural compliance.

7. Yesterday’s Judgment and Findings on Infractions

Following the procedural trajectory, Justice Lifu took up the substantive case and ruled in the plaintiff’s favour. The court held that the emergence of the Mark-led NWC violated both the ADC constitution and the Electoral Act, making all actions, congresses, and primary elections conducted under their administration legally unsustainable and void.

8. Atiku and the ADC’s Sharp Condemnation

Reacting swiftly to the judgment, Atiku Abubakar (through his campaign organisation) condemned the ruling, labelling it a panicked move by the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) to weaken the opposition. The ADC similarly rejected the verdict, characterising it as legally indefensible and a coordinated assault on multi-party democracy in Nigeria. The embattled politician, however, remained silent on the undemocratic role he and his colleagues played in stoking the crisis.

9. Jubilation from the Opposing Faction

Conversely, the faction loyal to Nafiu Bala Gombe hailed Justice Lifu’s verdict as a triumph of the rule of law. Proponents of this view argued that political parties cannot treat their internal constitutions with impunity and that leadership must emerge through transparent, lawful processes rather than imposition.

10. The Next Legal Frontier: Heading to the Appeal Court

The legal war is far from over. Representatives of the ADC and affected camps have announced their resolve to challenge yesterday’s judgment at the Court of Appeal. With the 2027 general elections drawing closer, the legal status of the party’s leadership and its presidential ticket hangs in a delicate balance, setting the stage for another high-stakes judicial showdown.

Ultimately, the Atiku camp stands as the true architect of the ADC’s current misfortune. By treating the party’s internal democracy with impunity and arbitrarily hijacking its leadership structures overnight, they sowed the seeds of bitter division and legal vulnerability. By ignoring due process and alienating foundational stakeholders, they have nobody else to blame but themselves for the party’s present ordeals.

Nafiu Bala Gombe had filed an ex parte application and instituted a legal suit at the Federal High Court on 2 September, 2025, challenging the legitimacy of the party’s leadership under the David Mark-led faction.

In late 2025 and early 2026, the case experienced prolonged delays in the Federal High Court under Justice Emeka Nwite, prompting grievances from the plaintiff over the slow pace of hearing the substantive matter. Some of Nafiu Bala Gombe’s supporters alleged that Justice Nwite is close to Peter Obi and that the judge dragged the case to favour him. Mr Obi was a member of the party at the time.

Following the stagnation at the lower court, Nafiu Bala Gombe approached the Court of Appeal to challenge the delays and seek intervention regarding the handling of the judicial process. The court granted status quo ante bellum, which the ADC challenged at the nation’s apex court.

The legal battle then moved to the apex court, which subsequently reviewed the procedural delays and dispute. The Supreme Court directed that the matter be remitted back to the Federal High Court, specifically instructing an expedited trial of the substantive case (which was later reassigned and handled by Justice Peter Lifu).

CHRONOLOGICAL REPORT OF THE PROCEEDINGS IN NAFIU BALA GOMBE v. ADC & ORS., FCT/ABJ/CS 1819/2025

29th July–2nd September 2025: Subject matter and commencement

The suit, filed on 2nd September 2025, arose from the emergence and recognition of national officers at the African Democratic Congress (ADC)’s 99th NEC meeting on 29th July 2025. The Plaintiff alleged that the requisite notice or a democratic election had not preceded their appointment.

The Plaintiff sought declaratory and injunctive reliefs challenging both the disputed ADC leadership and INEC’s recognition of it. He sought declarations that INEC was duty-bound to ensure the lawful constitution of the ADC’s governing bodies; that it could not validate the 99th NEC meeting; that its attendance at the meeting, report, recognition of the challenged NWC officers and validation of their assumption of leadership were unlawful and void; and that it could not deal with, monitor or enable unelected persons to function as executive officers.

He further sought orders nullifying the challenged officers’ acts from 29th July 2025, setting aside the meeting’s decisions and resolutions constituting their NWC membership, and recognising him as the only elected NWC member with a subsisting four-year tenure and entitlement to supervise ADC affairs. He also sought perpetual injunctions restraining INEC from recognising those persons and restraining the 2nd and 3rd Defendants, together with those they represented, from acting as ADC officers or members of its governing bodies.

The Plaintiff filed motions ex parte and on notice seeking interim and interlocutory injunctions. The suit was assigned to Hon. Justice Emeka Nwite for hearing.

4th September 2025–12th March 2026: Interlocutory appeal

On 4th September 2025, the trial Court declined to determine the interim application without notifying the other parties. It held: “I am of the view and I so hold that the interest of justice will be met by putting the other party on notice to show cause why the application should not be granted.”

On 18th September 2025, the 2nd Defendant, despite the plethora of cases decided by the Appellate Courts to desist from pursuing interlocutory appeals aimed at derailing or stalling the smooth flow of the main suit and indeed the course of justice, filed a notice of appeal challenging the above-quoted decision which was entirely made for his benefit.

On 27th January 2026, before the entry of the appeal before the lower Court, the Plaintiff filed a motion on notice seeking to amend his originating summons and thereby deeming the amended originating summons as having been properly filed and served.

On the 6th day of February 2026, 6 months after filing of the notice of appeal, the 2nd Defendant transmitted its record of appeal solely because the Plaintiff filed a motion to amend. The 2nd Defendant circumvented the consideration and determination of the pending motions, including the motion to amend, and indeed the suit.

On 12th March 2026, the Court of Appeal dismissed the interlocutory appeal no.: CA/ABJ/CV/145/2026. The lower Court, guided by the doctrine of necessity, made preservative orders to ensure that the main suit, which is still pending before the trial Court is not rendered nugatory and determined timeously. Thus:

“Finally, it is necessary to make preservatory orders to ensure that the subject matter of the dispute pending before the trial court is not prejudiced, as Courts have inherent powers to control and regulate proceedings to ensure justice… Accordingly, to protect the integrity of the proceedings and the eventual determination of the substantive suit pending before the Federal High Court in Suit No. FCT /ABJ/CS/1819/2025, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS:

-That Suit No. FCT/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, be and is hereby granted accelerated hearing in view of the Electoral Time Table released by the 4th Respondent.
– That the parties are hereby directed to maintain the status quo ante bellum and shall refrain from taking any step or doing any act capable of foisting a fait accompli on the court or otherwise rendering nugatory the proceedings before the trial court.
– Costs of N2,000,000.00 (Two Million Naira) are awarded in favour of the 1st Respondent.”

16th March–30th April 2026: Appeal to Supreme Court

On 16th March 2026, the 2nd Defendant pursued a further appeal to the Supreme Court. Persisting in its actions that prevent a meaningful resolution of the pending motions and the main suit before the trial Court.

On 30th April 2026, in SC/CV/180/2026, Senator David Mark v. Hon. Nafiu Bala Gombe & 4 ors., the Supreme Court affirmed the direction to return to the trial Court thus: “…the order by the court below for parties to return to the trial Court for determination of all pending processes in the 1st Respondent’s suit before it, is hereby affirmed.”

8th May 2026 – 5th November 2026: Return to trial

On 8th May 2026, the trial Court Coram: Hon Justice Emeka Nwite reconvened and the Defendants raised concerns that the Certified True Copy of the Supreme Court had yet to be obtained, thereby applying that the matter be adjourned sine die. Upon their application, the Court adjourned sine die pending receipt of the certified judgment.

On 19th May 2026, the Honourable Chief Judge in the exercise of his administrative powers and owing to the intervening event of the recommendation of Hon. Justice Emeka Nwite by the National Judicial Council for appointment to the Court of Appeal, which could render him functus officio, reassigned the suit to Hon. Justice Peter O. Lifu for accelerated hearing.

Prior to Hon. Justice Peter O. Lifu’s first sitting, the Defendants filed a barrage of about 23 applications, including motions for recusal, stay of proceedings, joinder, interrogatories, discovery, case-stated e.t.c. The Defendants sought to simply frustrate the hearing of the main suit.

On 30 June 2026, the Court, despite attempts by the Defendants to occasion an adjournment proceeded to hear the 23 pending applications. All five defendants moved their motions, and the Plaintiff adopted his responses. Rulings were scheduled for 7th July 2026.

On 7th July 2026, rulings were delivered dismissing the applications. In connection with the 2nd Defendant’s motions of 3rd and 8th June, the Court requested submissions on interrogatories and discovery in proceedings commenced by originating summons, the application of case-stated principles to the reliefs, and any unsettled or recondite legal issues warranting those principles. Only the Plaintiff and the 2nd Defendant were directed to file addresses of no more than two pages each within 48 hours.

On 24th July 2026, rulings were delivered dismissing the motions for interrogatories, discovery and case-stated and the matter was adjourned for hearing.

On 28 September 2026, the Plaintiff was ready to proceed with the hearing, but the Defendants sought strenuously for an adjournment sine die, citing in particular a motion filed at the Court of Appeal for Stay of proceedings Application. The Plaintiff opposed an indefinite adjournment, arguing that no notice of appeal supported a valid stay and that further delay would undermine the Supreme Court’s direction for accelerated hearing. The Court scheduled 5th October 2026 for ruling on the sine-die request and/or substantive hearing.

On 5th October 2026, the Court dismissed the application for an adjournment sine die and proceeded to hear the substantive suits.

*5th November 2026: Judgment and eventual outcome*

The Court granted the reliefs sought by the Plaintiff. Particularly holding that:

– INEC must not recognise the ADC’s 99th NEC meeting for Electoral Act non-compliance;
– INEC must recognise Nafiu Bala as the ADC’s only recognised NEC member.
– Senator David Mark (2nd Defendant) and Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola (3rd Defendant) have no right to continue presenting themselves as ADC members.
– The meetings, decisions and resolutions reached by the NWC under their control have been set aside.

● Abdulrahman Abdulaziz, a political analyst, is based in Abuja.