The Supreme Court of Nigeria has fixed Tuesday, April 14, 2026, for the hearing of an appeal filed by the national chairman of the African Democratic Congress, Senator David Mark, against the Court of Appeal’s March 12 ruling that dismissed his challenge and directed parties to return to the trial court a development that dramatically escalates the ADC’s leadership crisis to the highest court in the land and creates a potential jurisdictional clash with proceedings at the Federal High Court scheduled for the same day.
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/TheNigerialawyer-WhatsApp-Channel1.jpg")
In the appeal marked SC/CV/180/2026, filed by his counsel Realwan Okpanachi, Mark is asking the Supreme Court to grant an order staying the execution of the Court of Appeal’s ruling pending the hearing and determination of his appeal effectively seeking to freeze all proceedings arising from the appellate court’s decision, including INEC’s derecognition of his leadership and the resumption of Nafiu Bala Gombe’s suit at the trial court.
The hearing notice was sent to the parties on Friday through the litigation department of the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court’s choice of April 14 creates an extraordinary situation: the same ADC leadership dispute will be before two different courts on the same day.
Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court had earlier fixed April 14 for the hearing of Gombe’s suit (FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025) challenging Mark’s leadership — the very case that Mark’s Supreme Court appeal seeks to stay.
Legal observers note that the lower court may step down the matter or adjourn proceedings pending the hearing at the apex court, in deference to the hierarchy of courts. This principle of judicial hierarchy means that when a higher court is seized of an issue, lower courts typically defer to avoid conflicting rulings.
If the Supreme Court grants Mark’s application for a stay of proceedings, the Federal High Court would be bound to suspend all hearings in Gombe’s suit until the Supreme Court resolves the appeal potentially buying Mark months of additional time.
Mark’s appeal seeks several specific reliefs from the apex court.
First, an order staying execution of the Court of Appeal’s judgment delivered on March 12, 2026, pending the hearing and determination of his appeal. This would effectively suspend the appellate court’s directive for parties to return to the trial court and maintain the status quo ante bellum.
Second, an order restraining INEC from altering the party’s current national leadership structure as constituted and represented by Mark, pending the hearing and determination of the appeal. This relief directly targets INEC’s April 1 decision to remove Mark and Aregbesola’s names from its portal.
Third, an order staying further proceedings in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025 pending before Justice Nwite at the Federal High Court. If granted, this would freeze Gombe’s case entirely until the Supreme Court determines the appeal.
The respondents in the appeal are Nafiu Bala Gombe (first respondent), the ADC (second respondent), Rauf Aregbesola (third respondent), INEC (fourth respondent), and Ralph Nwosu (fifth respondent).
The ADC leadership battle has now traversed three levels of the Nigerian court system in under eight months.
On September 2, 2025, Gombe filed suit at the Federal High Court seeking to restrain INEC from recognising the Mark-led executives and to be recognised as acting national chairman. He maintained that he never resigned his position as national vice-chairman and argued that he ought to have assumed leadership following Nwosu’s exit.
The motion ex parte was heard on September 4, 2025, with Justice Nwite directing that respondents be put on notice to show cause. Dissatisfied with an interim ruling, Mark filed an appeal to the Court of Appeal challenging the Federal High Court’s jurisdiction.
On March 12, 2026, the Court of Appeal dismissed Mark’s case in its entirety, holding that it was “incompetent and unmeritorious.” The appellate court directed parties to return to the trial court and maintain the status quo ante bellum pending the determination of the substantive suit.
On April 1, INEC announced that it would no longer recognise either faction, removing Mark and Aregbesola’s names from its portal and refusing to engage with or monitor either group’s activities.
Mark then filed a motion at the Federal High Court on April 7, through counsel Sulaiman Usman SAN, seeking to compel INEC to restore his leadership on the portal and seeking accelerated hearing.
Simultaneously, Mark has now taken the fight to the Supreme Court through the appeal filed by Okpanachi, asking the apex court to overturn the Court of Appeal’s decision and freeze all lower court proceedings.
At the Federal High Court level, Mark has filed a preliminary objection challenging the competence of Gombe’s suit on multiple grounds.
He argues that Gombe lacks locus standi to institute the action, having resigned his position as national vice-chairman of the party — a claim Gombe disputes, alleging the resignation letter was forged.
Mark contends that the suit is based on “falsehood and suppression of material facts” and relates to the internal affairs of a political party, which he says are not justiciable under Section 83 of the Electoral Act.
These arguments, which were rejected by the Court of Appeal when it dismissed Mark’s jurisdictional challenge as “incompetent and unmeritorious,” will now be tested before the Supreme Court.
Gombe maintains that he never resigned his position and that the resignation letter produced by the Mark faction is a forgery — though no criminal complaint regarding the alleged forgery has been publicly filed.
He argues that he ought to have assumed the national chairmanship following Nwosu’s departure, in line with the party’s constitution, and that the process through which Mark and Aregbesola were installed as interim chairman and secretary violated the ADC’s constitutional requirements for membership and eligibility.
Gombe has publicly stated that he will not honour any invitation for reconciliation from what he described as “illegitimate leaders,” has proposed barring anyone above 55 from contesting under the ADC, and has threatened to expel Mark and his associates if he prevails in court.
INEC has positioned itself as neutral, refusing to recognise either faction following the Court of Appeal’s ruling. The commission stated it would cease accepting correspondence from either side, would not monitor their meetings, congresses, or conventions, and removed Mark’s name from its portal.
However, INEC has also filed an affidavit in court arguing that injunctions cannot apply to completed acts and that party leadership disputes fall outside the scope of judicial interference a position that appears to support the argument that courts should not be adjudicating internal ADC matters.
The Supreme Court hearing adds a fourth active suit to the ADC’s already overwhelming legal landscape this week.
April 13 — Judgment in the Abejide suit before Justice Musa Liman at the Federal High Court, seeking to nullify Mark’s leadership.
April 14 — Supreme Court hearing on Mark’s appeal (SC/CV/180/2026) and the scheduled Federal High Court hearing on Gombe’s suit before Justice Nwite.
April 17 — Ruling on the amendment application in the deregistration suit before Justice Peter Lifu.
The Supreme Court’s entry into the crisis introduces the possibility that the apex court could issue definitive orders that resolve the jurisdictional questions plaguing the lower courts or alternatively, could grant a stay that suspends all proceedings and prolongs the uncertainty for additional months.
Tuesday, April 14, will be one of the most consequential days in the ADC’s existence.
If the Supreme Court grants Mark’s stay application, the Federal High Court proceedings would be frozen, INEC would be restrained from further altering the party’s leadership records, and the status quo would be preserved until the apex court hears the substantive appeal potentially delaying resolution well beyond the party primary window of April 23 to May 30.
If the Supreme Court declines the stay, the Federal High Court hearing before Justice Nwite would proceed, with potential rulings on Mark’s motion to restore his names on INEC’s portal, Gombe’s substantive challenge, and the preliminary objections raised by all defendants.
Either way, Tuesday’s proceedings will significantly shape the trajectory of the ADC crisis and the broader question of whether Nigeria’s opposition can organise itself in time for the 2027 elections.
With the presidential election now just nine months away, every day of unresolved litigation reduces the ADC’s capacity to function as a political party and Tuesday’s dual hearings at the Supreme Court and Federal High Court represent either a potential breakthrough or another chapter in a crisis that shows no sign of resolution.
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
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.
_______________________________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________ [A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
