The Court of Appeal in Abuja has upheld a Federal High Court ruling restraining the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising or participating in state congresses organised by committees appointed by the David Mark-led caretaker leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).
In a split 2-1 decision delivered on Monday, the appellate court affirmed the lower court’s order stopping the Mark-led leadership from interfering with the tenure and functions of the party’s elected state executives.
Delivering the lead judgment, Justice Okon Abang, with Justice Donatus Okorowo concurring, said there was no basis to overturn the restraining order issued by Justice Joyce Abdulmalik on April 29.
The court agreed that the authority to conduct state congresses rests with duly elected state executive committees, not the party’s national caretaker leadership.
However, the presiding justice, Abba Mohammed, dissented. In his minority judgment, he held that the dispute was an internal party matter beyond the jurisdiction of the courts and faulted the Federal High Court for entertaining the case.
The suit was filed by seven aggrieved ADC members — Don Norman Obinna, Johnny Tovie Derek, Obah C. Ehigiator, Olona Yinka, Charles Idowu Omideji, Samuel Pam Gyang and Obianyo Patrick — who said they were acting on behalf of all ADC state chairmen and state executive committees.
They challenged the decision of the David Mark-led caretaker committee to appoint committees to conduct state congresses, arguing that only duly elected party organs have such powers under the ADC constitution.
The defendants in the suit included the ADC, David Mark, Patricia Akwashiki, Bolaji Abdullahi, Rauf Aregbesola, Oserheimen Osunbor, who were sued on behalf of the caretaker/interim National Working Committee, and INEC.
In its earlier ruling, the Federal High Court held that the four-year tenure of the party’s State Working Committees and State Executive Committees remained valid until properly conducted congresses and a national convention were held.
Justice Abdulmalik ruled that neither the 1999 Constitution nor the ADC constitution empowered the caretaker committee to appoint committees to conduct state congresses.
She further held that Section 223 of the Constitution requires political parties to conduct periodic democratic elections, while Article 23 of the ADC constitution provides that national and state officers may serve a maximum of two terms spanning eight years.
Although courts generally avoid interfering in the internal affairs of political parties, she said judicial intervention becomes necessary where constitutional or statutory provisions have allegedly been breached.
The trial court also dismissed the defendants’ preliminary objection challenging its jurisdiction, holding that the case involved INEC’s constitutional responsibilities and therefore fell within the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court.
It also ruled that the plaintiffs had the legal standing to institute the action.
Affirming the decision, the Court of Appeal said judicial intervention was necessary to safeguard Nigeria’s democratic process.
Justice Abang said the case could not be dismissed as a mere internal party dispute because it raised constitutional questions.
“Once a complaint before the court is anchored on a constitutional infraction, the shield of internal affairs drops and the veil is lifted for judicial intervention,” he held.
The appellate court consequently dismissed the appeal filed by the ADC, marked CA/ABJ/CV/608/2026.
It also ruled that the state congresses and national convention conducted by the Mark-led leadership were null and void because they were held in defiance of an existing court order issued on April 14.
The court awarded costs of ₦10 million against the ADC.
