The Supreme Court has vacated the order that directed the the African Democratic Congress (ADC) to maintain status quo ante bellum pending the determination of its leadership crisis.

The apex court, in a unanimous decision by a five-member panel headed by Justice Mohammed Lawal Garba, held that the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal acted beyond its jurisdiction by unilaterally issuing such an order after it had already dismissed a case that was brought before it by one of the factions.

“Giving such an order in an appeal it had already dismissed was unnecessary, unwarranted and improper,” the Supreme Court held.

It held that the appeal that was filed before it by Senator David Mark succeeded in part, even as it dismissed the aspect that challenged an ex parte order the Federal High Court made for service of processes in the suit filed by aggrieved members of the party.

The apex court directed the factions to return to the trial court for continuation of hearing of the case.

It will be recalled that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had removed Mark and Rauf Aregbesola from its portal and website as ADC National Chairman and Secretary, respectively, on April 1, citing the Court of Appeal’s judgment.

The electoral body said it would, in line with the order for maintenance of the status quo ante bellum, not recognise any of the warring factions until the legal dispute is determined.

Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court Abuja, has restrained former Senate President David Mark and other party figures from interfering with the functions and tenure of elected state executives of the African Democratic Congress, ADC.

The Judge also barred the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising or participating in any congress organised by a disputed caretaker leadership of the ADC.

The order made on Wednesday followed an originating summons filed by Norman Obinna and six others on behalf of ADC state chairpersons and executive committees.

They challenged the legality of actions taken by a caretaker or interim national leadership.

The plaintiffs argued that the caretaker body lacked the constitutional authority to organise state congresses or appoint committees for that purpose.

They asked the court to affirm their tenure and stop any parallel process.

In her judgment, Justice Abdulmalik noted that she found “the issue in the originating summons meritorious”.

She said the germane issue was whether the second to sixth defendants, including Mr Mark, had constitutional or statutory authority to assume the powers of an elected state organ of the ADC, whose tenure is constitutionally guaranteed.

According to her, section 223 of the 1999 Constitution provides that political parties shall conduct periodic elections on a democratic basis, while article 23 of the party’s constitution provides that national and state officers shall hold office for a maximum of two terms of eight years.

Justice Abdulmalik, therefore said that “the question is whether there is any infraction committed by Mr Mark and co-defendants when they convened meetings and appointed a body known as a congress committee to organise state congresses.”

On the issue of internal affairs of political parties raised by the defendants, she noted that “the law is settled that courts will not interfere. However, where there is an allegation of breach of constitutional or statutory provisions, the court has a duty to intervene.”

“Where a party alleges that its constitution has been violated, the court is bound to adjudicate. Any argument that this court lacks jurisdiction on that basis fails,” she ruled.

She held that political parties must comply strictly with their constitutions and that courts can intervene where there is a breach of constitutional or statutory provisions.

She found that the procedure adopted by the defendants, including the appointment of a “congress committee”, is not recognised by the party’s constitution.

The judge ruled that the tenure of state executive committees remains valid and must be allowed to run its course.

She said only those elected structures have the authority to organise state congresses.

The court set aside the appointment of the committee and restrained INEC from recognising any congress organised by it.

The court also restrained Mr Mark and other defendants from organising congresses or conventions outside the provisions of the party’s constitution.

The judge further restrained them from taking steps that could undermine or disrupt the authority of the state executive committees.

The suit was instituted by way of originating summons by the plaintiffs, led by Mr Obinna and six others. They sued on behalf of state chairmen and
executive committees of the ADC.

The defendants include the ADC, David Mark, Patricia Akwashiki, Malam Bolaji Abdullahi, Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola, Oserheimen Osunbor, and INEC.

The plaintiffs challenged the legality of caretaker or interim national working committees and urged the court to restrain INEC from recognising or participating in any congress organised by the caretaker committee.

The plaintiffs contended that, under the party’s constitution and the 1999 Constitution (as amended), the tenure of state executive committees subsists until valid congresses are conducted, and that any attempt to bypass them undermines internal party democracy.

However, the defendants, in preliminary objections, counter affidavits and written addresses, urged the court to dismiss the suit.

Mr Mark and others argued that the matter relates to internal affairs of a political party, is not justiciable, that the plaintiffs lack locus standi, and that the suit is incompetent.

Before delivering judgment, the court also ruled on the preliminary objections and counter affidavits filed by the defendants.

On jurisdiction, Justice Abdulmalik held that “the subject matter of the plaintiff’s action pertains to the affairs of INEC,” and therefore falls within the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court under section 251 of the Constitution.

On the argument that the plaintiffs failed to exhaust internal dispute resolution mechanisms, the judge declined to uphold the objection at that stage. She held that determining that issue would amount to deciding substantive questions prematurely.

On locus standi, she held that “the plaintiffs’ locus standi and capacity emanate from the alleged violation” and that they share a common grievance, making the representative action proper.

Consequently, she held that the objections lacked merit and were resolved in favour of the plaintiffs.

…Reaffirms support for 2027

The Enugu North Senatorial District will, on May 2, 2026, host a mega endorsement rally in honour of Governor of Enugu State, Dr. Peter Ndubuisi Mbah, and President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, in appreciation of what they described as their impactful leadership and contributions to the development of the zone.

The rally, which is expected to draw stakeholders from across the senatorial district and beyond, will hold at the Nsukka Township Stadium by 10 a.m.

The organizers, in a statement issued by the Chairman of the Central Planning Committee, Chief Ikeje Asogwa, said the event would also serve as a platform for the people of Enugu North Senatorial District, also known as Nsukka Zone, to reaffirm their resolve to support both leaders to return to Government House, Enugu, and the Aso Rock Presidential Villa, Abuja, in 2027.

They noted that the Mbah administration had executed many impactful projects across the Enugu North zone, including the establishment of Smart Green Schools and Type 2 Primary Healthcare Centres in each of the 102 electoral wards, the revamp and re-equipping of the Type 3 Primary Healthcare Centre at Adani, and key road infrastructure such as the ongoing dualisation of the Abakpa–Ugwuogo Nike–Ekwegbe–Opi Road.

Also listed is the Ama Brewery–Eke–Akama Oghe–Iwollo–Umulopka Road, which is currently at an advanced stage of completion, alongside numerous other projects being executed directly by the state government and through local governments, as well as those in the pipeline.

Expected at the rally are political leaders across party lines, traditional rulers, religious leaders, business and market leaders, women and youth groups, farmers, artisans, civil society organisations, academics and professionals, students, among others.