A Federal High Court in Abuja has restrained the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising or participating in any congress organised by the disputed caretaker leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).
Delivering judgment, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik also barred former Senate President, David Mark, and other party figures from interfering with the functions and tenure of elected ADC state executives.
The suit was filed by Norman Obinna and six others on behalf of ADC state chairpersons and executive committees. The plaintiffs challenged the legality of actions taken by the party’s caretaker or interim national leadership, arguing that the body lacked constitutional authority to organise state congresses or appoint committees for that purpose.
Justice Abdulmalik held that the case was meritorious, stating that the central issue was whether Mr Mark and other defendants had “constitutional or statutory authority to assume the powers of an elected state organ of the ADC, whose tenure is constitutionally guaranteed.”
The judge referenced Section 223 of the 1999 Constitution, which mandates political parties to conduct periodic elections democratically, alongside Article 23 of the ADC constitution, which provides that national and state officers shall serve a maximum of two terms spanning eight years.
“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,” the judge said.
Addressing the defendants’ argument that the matter concerned the internal affairs of a political party, Justice Abdulmalik ruled that courts could intervene where constitutional or statutory breaches are alleged.
“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,” she said.
“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.”
The court further held that political parties must comply strictly with their constitutions and found that the procedure adopted by the defendants — including the appointment of a “congress committee” — was not recognised under the ADC constitution.
Justice Abdulmalik affirmed that the tenure of the state executive committees remains valid and that only elected party structures have the authority to organise state congresses.
Consequently, the court nullified the appointment of the congress committee and restrained INEC from recognising any congress organised by it.
The judge also restrained Mr Mark and other defendants from organising congresses or conventions outside the provisions of the ADC constitution or taking steps capable of undermining the authority of the state executive committees.
The defendants in the suit include the ADC, David Mark, Rauf Aregbesola, Patricia Akwashiki, Malam Bolaji Abdullahi, Oserheimen Osunbor, and INEC.
The defendants had urged the court to dismiss the suit, arguing that the matter was an internal party affair, non-justiciable, and that the plaintiffs lacked locus standi.
However, Justice Abdulmalik dismissed the objections, ruling that the case falls within the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court because it concerns the affairs of INEC under Section 251 of the Constitution.
On the issue of locus standi, the judge held that “the plaintiffs’ locus standi and capacity emanate from the alleged violation” and noted that they shared a common grievance, making the representative action proper.
She therefore resolved all objections in favour of the plaintiffs.
