A Federal High Court in Abuja has ruled against the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), restraining it from recognising or participating in any state congress organised by a disputed leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).
The court also issued orders preventing former Senate President David Mark and other party stakeholders from interfering with the tenure and functions of duly elected state executives.
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik delivered the judgment, granting reliefs sought by plaintiffs representing ADC state chairpersons and executive committees.
The judge barred INEC from recognising any congress conducted by the contested leadership and nullified steps taken to organise such congresses outside the party’s constitutional framework.
She also restrained David Mark and other defendants from organising congresses or conventions that do not comply with the ADC constitution.
The case arose from an originating summons filed by Norman Obinna and six others on behalf of ADC state executives.
The plaintiffs challenged actions taken by an interim national leadership, arguing that it lacked constitutional authority to organise state congresses or appoint committees for that purpose.
They asked the court to affirm their tenure and halt any parallel congress process.
In her judgment, Justice Abdulmalik stated that she found:
“the issue in the originating summons meritorious”
She explained that the central question was whether the defendants had the constitutional or statutory authority to assume powers belonging to elected state organs of the party.
According to her, Section 223 of the 1999 Constitution mandates political parties to conduct periodic democratic elections, while Article 23 of the ADC constitution defines the tenure of party officials.
Addressing arguments that the matter was an internal party issue, 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.”
She further ruled:
“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”
Justice Abdulmalik emphasised that political parties must strictly comply with their constitutions.
She held that the process adopted by the defendants, including the appointment of a “congress committee,” is not recognised under the ADC constitution.
The court affirmed that the tenure of state executive committees remains valid and must not be disrupted.
The court set aside the appointment of the congress committee and restrained INEC from recognising any congress organised through it.
It also barred David Mark and other defendants from taking actions that could undermine the authority of the state executive structures.
Only duly elected party organs, the court ruled, have the authority to conduct state congresses.
The suit was filed by Norman Obinna and six others representing ADC state executives.
Defendants in the case include:
- The African Democratic Congress (ADC)
- David Mark
- Patricia Akwashiki
- Bolaji Abdullahi
- Rauf Aregbesola
- Oserheimen Osunbor
- INEC
The defendants had urged the court to dismiss the case, arguing that:
- The matter concerns internal party affairs
- It is not justiciable
- The plaintiffs lack locus standi
- The suit is incompetent
Before delivering judgment, the court ruled on preliminary objections raised by the defendants.
On jurisdiction, Justice Abdulmalik held:
“the subject matter of the plaintiff’s action pertains to the affairs of INEC”
She concluded that the case falls within the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court under Section 251 of the Constitution.
On the issue of locus standi, the judge ruled that:
“the plaintiffs’ locus standi and capacity emanate from the alleged violation”
She added that the plaintiffs share a common grievance, making the representative suit valid.
All objections raised by the defendants were dismissed for lacking merit.
The ruling reinforces the authority of party constitutions and underscores the court’s role in ensuring internal democracy within political parties.
By restraining INEC and party leaders from recognising or organising disputed congresses, the court has effectively upheld the tenure and powers of ADC’s elected state executives.
Discover more from LN247
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
