The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has delivered a significant ruling in the ongoing leadership dispute within the African Democratic Congress (ADC), directing the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) not to recognise or participate in any state congresses organised by the party’s contested caretaker leadership.
The judgment, delivered on Wednesday by Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, clarified that the authority to conduct state congresses rests solely with the party’s elected state executive committees.
In addition to restraining INEC, the court also issued orders preventing former Senate President David Mark and other members of the caretaker leadership from interfering with the tenure or functions of the elected state executives.
The ruling comes at a critical time, as the ADC’s internal leadership crisis is currently before the Supreme Court of Nigeria, which heard an appeal on April 22, 2026, concerning the authority of the caretaker committee led by David Mark.
The apex court has reserved its judgment on whether the Federal High Court has jurisdiction over the matter.
In her decision, Justice Abdulmalik highlighted the key legal issue at the heart of the dispute:
“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,” she explained.
The case was brought before the court by plaintiffs led by Don Norman Obinna and six others, who challenged the actions of the caretaker committee.
They argued that the committee lacked the constitutional mandate to organise state congresses or set up committees for that purpose, insisting that their tenure as duly elected state executives remained valid.
Justice Abdulmalik examined the constitutional framework guiding political parties, noting that Section 223 of the 1999 Constitution requires parties to conduct periodic elections in a democratic manner.
She also referenced provisions within the ADC’s constitution, which stipulate that party officials serve a maximum of two terms, amounting to eight years.
Reaffirming the importance of internal party rules, she stated that “political parties must comply strictly with their constitutions,” adding that the courts have the responsibility to intervene when there is evidence of a breach of constitutional or statutory provisions.
On the broader issue of judicial involvement in party affairs, the judge clarified:
“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.”
The court ultimately found that the caretaker committee’s actions, including the appointment of a congress committee to organise state congresses, were not recognised under the party’s constitution.
It further held that the tenure of the elected state executive committees remains valid and that only those duly elected have the authority to organise party congresses.
As part of the ruling, the court set aside the appointment of the caretaker committee and ordered INEC to refrain from recognising any congress organised under its authority.
Additionally, David Mark and other members of the caretaker leadership were restrained from organising congresses or conventions outside the provisions of the party’s constitution, as well as from taking actions that could undermine the authority of the elected state executives.
The judgment is expected to have significant implications for the ADC’s internal structure and may influence the outcome of the pending Supreme Court decision.
