ABUJA — The Court of Appeal in Abuja has upheld a Federal High Court judgment restraining the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising or participating in any state congresses conducted by committees appointed by the caretaker leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) headed by former Senate President David Mark.
In a split decision delivered by a three-member panel, the appellate court affirmed the lower court’s ruling that only duly elected state executive committees of the party have the constitutional authority to organise state congresses.
The majority judgment, delivered by Justice Okon Abang and supported by Justice Donatus Okorowo, dismissed the appeal filed by the ADC, holding that there was no basis to overturn the restraining orders issued by Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court on April 29.
The Court of Appeal consequently upheld the order restraining INEC from recognising the outcome of any state congresses organised by committees constituted by the David Mark-led caretaker leadership.
It also affirmed the lower court’s decision preventing the caretaker executives from interfering with the tenure and constitutional functions of the party’s elected state executive committees.
Justice Abang held that the responsibility for conducting state congresses lies with duly elected state party structures and not with the national caretaker leadership.
The appellate court further ruled that the congresses and the party’s national convention organised by the caretaker leadership were invalid because they were conducted in defiance of an existing court order issued on April 14.
According to the court, judicial intervention was necessary to safeguard constitutional order within the party.
“Once a complaint before the court is anchored on a constitutional infraction, the shield of internal affairs drops and the veil is lifted for judicial intervention,” Justice Abang stated in the lead judgment.
He added that the court had a duty to intervene to “prevent anarchy and ensure the survival of democracy in Nigeria.”
However, the decision was not unanimous.
In a dissenting judgment, the presiding Justice of the panel, Justice Abba Mohammed, held that the dispute related to the internal affairs of a political party and was therefore not justiciable.
Justice Mohammed ruled that the Federal High Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter, maintaining that the trial court ought not to have assumed jurisdiction over the dispute.
The case originated from a suit filed by aggrieved members of the ADC, including Don Norman Obinna, Johnny Tovie Derek, Obah C. Ehigiator, Olona Yinka, Charles Idowu Omideji, Samuel Pam Gyang and Obianyo Patrick, who instituted the action on behalf of themselves and all state chairmen and members of the party’s state executive committees.
The plaintiffs challenged the decision of the David Mark-led caretaker committee to constitute committees for the conduct of state congresses, arguing that the move violated the party’s constitution.
They contended that only duly elected organs recognised under the ADC Constitution possess the authority to organise state congresses and that the planned congresses under the caretaker leadership were unconstitutional.
In her earlier judgment, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik agreed with the plaintiffs, holding that the tenure of the ADC’s State Working Committees and State Executive Committees remained valid until properly constituted congresses and a national convention are conducted.
The trial court ruled that neither the 1999 Constitution nor the Constitution of the ADC empowered the caretaker National Working Committee led by David Mark to appoint committees to conduct state congresses.
Justice Abdulmalik also held that although courts generally refrain from interfering in the internal affairs of political parties, they are empowered to intervene where constitutional or statutory violations are alleged.
She further dismissed preliminary objections challenging the competence of the suit, holding that the case involved the constitutional responsibilities of INEC and therefore fell within the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court under Section 251 of the 1999 Constitution.
The court also rejected the defendants’ argument that the plaintiffs failed to exhaust the party’s internal dispute resolution mechanisms before approaching the court, holding that they had the requisite legal standing to institute the action.
In its final decision, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal marked CA/ABJ/CV/608/2026 and awarded ₦10 million in costs against the African Democratic Congress.
