*Challenge Legality Of Interim Leadership And Congresses
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/TheNigerialawyer-WhatsApp-Channel1.jpg")
The Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered all parties in a new suit over the leadership crisis rocking the African Democratic Congress to maintain the status quo pending the determination of the case adding yet another judicial front to a crisis that now spans the Supreme Court, multiple Federal High Court judges, state high courts, and competing factions, each wielding court orders against the other.
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik issued the directive on Tuesday after counsel to one of the defendants sought an adjournment to respond to the plaintiffs’ filings. The judge cautioned against any action that could render the proceedings nugatory and adjourned the matter to April 23 for definite hearing.
The suit was filed by Norman Obinna and six others on behalf of ADC state chairmen and their executive committees introducing a new category of litigants into the ADC crisis: the elected state-level party executives who argue that the caretaker or interim National Working Committee led by David Mark lacks constitutional authority to act in place of their duly elected structures.
The suit was instituted by Norman Obinna and six other individuals representing ADC state chairmen and their state executive committees across multiple states.
These are elected party officials at the state level who claim their tenure remains valid under the party’s constitution and the 1999 Constitution (as amended), and who are challenging what they describe as an attempt by the interim national leadership to sideline them through unconstitutional means.
The defendants include the ADC as first defendant, Senator David Mark, Patricia Akwashiki, Bolaji Abdullahi (the party’s National Publicity Secretary), Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola, Oserheimen Osunbor, and the Independent National Electoral Commission.
The inclusion of INEC as a defendant reflects the plaintiffs’ concern that the electoral commission might recognise or participate in exercises organised by the interim leadership a recognition they argue would be unlawful given their challenge to the caretaker committee’s authority.
The plaintiffs’ case rests on several key arguments and prayers.
They argue that the caretaker committee lacks constitutional authority to organise state congresses or appoint congress committees functions that, under the party’s constitution, can only be performed by properly constituted party organs following prescribed procedures.
They insist that their tenure as duly elected state executives remains valid until valid congresses are conducted in accordance with the party’s constitution meaning the interim national leadership cannot simply declare their positions vacant or appoint replacements without following due process.
They are seeking court declarations affirming that only properly constituted state executive committees can conduct congresses within their respective states.
They are urging the court to restrain INEC from recognising or participating in any exercise including congresses, conventions, or primaries organised by the interim leadership.
The plaintiffs warn that any attempt to sideline elected state executives undermines internal democracy and violates both the party’s constitution and the 1999 Constitution.
Justice Abdulmalik’s ruling was measured but firm. She directed all parties to file their processes and ordered that all pending applications would be taken together with the substantive suit a procedural approach designed to ensure comprehensive consideration of all issues at once rather than piecemeal adjudication.
The judge ordered that hearing notices be served on all relevant parties ahead of the next sitting, ensuring that every defendant has formal notice of the proceedings and the opportunity to participate.
Most significantly, she directed all parties to maintain the status quo pending the determination of the case — meaning neither the interim national leadership nor the state executives should take actions that alter the current position, including conducting congresses, dissolving state executives, or appointing new officials.
The caution against any action that could render the proceedings nugatory carries an implicit warning: if any party proceeds with activities that the court is being asked to rule upon, they do so at the risk of those activities being subsequently nullified.
The state chairmen’s suit introduces a dimension that has not been central to the previous ADC litigation — the relationship between the national and state levels of the party.
The earlier suits filed by Nafiu Bala Gombe and Leke Abejide focused primarily on the legitimacy of Mark’s emergence as national chairman and whether the process through which he assumed leadership complied with the party’s constitution and the Electoral Act.
The state chairmen’s suit, by contrast, challenges the operational authority of the Mark-led leadership to direct state-level party activities — specifically the conduct of congresses that would produce new state executives and serve as the foundation for a national convention.
This distinction is important because even if Mark’s national chairmanship survives legal challenge, the state chairmen’s suit could prevent the party from conducting the congresses needed to build structures from the ground up for the 2027 elections.
The state chairmen’s suit before Justice Abdulmalik is now part of an extraordinary proliferation of ADC-related cases across Nigeria’s courts.
At the Supreme Court, Mark’s appeal (SC/CV/180/2026) was heard on Tuesday and adjourned to April 22, with a five-member panel led by Justice Lawal Garba considering Mark’s application to stay the Court of Appeal’s March 12 ruling.
At the Federal High Court before Justice Nwite, Gombe’s suit (FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025) challenging Mark’s leadership is pending, with Mark’s motion to restore his names on INEC’s portal also awaiting hearing.
Before Justice Musa Liman, judgment in the Abejide suit (FHC/ABJ/CS/1637/2025) was expected on April 13 also seeking to nullify Mark’s leadership.
Before Justice Peter Lifu, the former legislators’ deregistration suit (FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/25) has a ruling on the amendment application fixed for April 17.
At the Adamawa State High Court, the state chairman’s suit restraining ADC congresses in Adamawa was adjourned to April 15.
And now before Justice Abdulmalik, the state chairmen’s collective suit adds another layer with a status quo order in place and hearing fixed for April 23.
The sheer number of active cases now at least six across multiple courts and judicial levels makes the ADC the most litigated political party in Nigeria’s history ahead of a general election.
The adjournment of the state chairmen’s suit to April 23 is particularly significant because that date is also the opening of the party primaries window under the Electoral Act 2026.
If the status quo order remains in force on April 23, the ADC will be unable to conduct congresses, conventions, or primaries under the interim leadership without potentially violating the court’s directive effectively freezing the party’s electoral preparations at the very moment they need to begin.
The convergence of the hearing date with the primaries deadline creates a pressure point that could force a resolution or deepen the paralysis.
The state chairmen’s suit confirms what has become increasingly apparent: the ADC’s leadership crisis is not simply a dispute between two factions at the national level but a comprehensive breakdown of party governance from the national to the state level.
With elected state executives challenging the national leadership’s authority, with multiple courts issuing competing orders, with INEC refusing to recognise either faction, and with the Supreme Court yet to rule on the fundamental question of Mark’s legitimacy, the ADC faces a governance vacuum that extends from its national headquarters to its state structures.
For the millions of Nigerians who had hoped the ADC would serve as a credible opposition vehicle in 2027, the state chairmen’s suit represents another obstacle in a path that is becoming increasingly impassable not through any failure of public support, but through the internal contradictions and legal warfare that have consumed the party from within.
[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
Available now for NGN 40,000 at ASC Publications, 10, Boyle Street, Onikan, Lagos. Beside High Court, TBS. Email publications@ayindesanni.com or WhatsApp +2347056667384. Purchase Link: https://paystack.com/buy/evidence-act-complete-annotation
______________________________________________________________________
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FOR LAWYERS: A COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE
Reimagine your practice with the power of AI “...this is the only Nigerian book I know of on the topic.” — Ohio Books Ltd
Authored by Ben Ijeoma Adigwe, Esq., ACIArb (UK), LL.M, Dip. in Artificial Intelligence, Director, Delta State Ministry of Justice, Asaba, Nigeria.
Bonus:
Get a FREE eBook titled “How to Use the AI in Legalpedia and Law Pavilion” with every purchase.
How to Order: 📞 Call, Text, or WhatsApp: 08034917063 | 07055285878 📧 Email: benadigwe1@gmail.com 🌐 Website: www.benadigwe.com
Ebook Version: Access directly online at: https://selar.com/prv626
______________________________________________________________________ “Bridging Theory And Courtroom Practice” — Hagler Sunny Okorie, Nathaniel Ngozi Ikeocha Unveil ‘Functional’ Tort Law Book For Nigerian Legal System
The book, titled The Law of Torts in Nigeria: A Functional Approach, authored by Professor Hagler Sunny Okorie Ph.D and Ikeocha, Nathaniel Ngozi Esq, offers law students, practitioners, and academics a comprehensive guide to understanding and applying tort law in Nigerian courts. Interested buyers can place orders via the following contact numbers: 08028636615, 08037667945, 08032253813, or +234 902 196 2209.
______________________________________________________________________
“Enhance Legal Practice With Authoritative Reports” — Alexander Payne Offers Comprehensive Law Reports, Spanning Over A Century Of Nigerian Jurisprudence
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
