Court stops INEC from recognising ADC congresses organised by Mark-led committee

The Federal High Court in Abuja has barred the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising or participating in any state congress organised by committees appointed by the Senator David Mark-led caretaker leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

Delivering judgment on Wednesday, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik also restrained the Mark-led group from interfering with the tenure and functions of elected state executives of the party.

The court held that the responsibility for conducting state congresses lies with the state executive committees, not the national leadership of a political party.

It further ruled that the four-year tenure of the ADC’s State Working Committees and State Executive Committees remains valid and subsisting pending the conduct of properly constituted congresses and a national convention.

The judgment followed a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/581/2026, filed by aggrieved party members, including Don Norman Obinna, Johnny Tovie Derek, Obah C. Ehigiator, Olona Yinka, Dr Charles Idowu Omideji, Samuel Pam Gyang, and Obianyo Patrick. They approached the court on behalf of themselves and other state chairmen and executive committees of the ADC.

The defendants in the suit included the ADC, Senator David Mark, Senator Patricia Akwashiki, Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola, Professor Oserheimen Osunbor—sued on behalf of the caretaker/interim National Working Committee—and INEC.

The plaintiffs challenged the legality of the caretaker leadership’s decision to constitute a congress committee to conduct state congresses, arguing that such action violated the party’s constitution.

They also contended that any congress conducted under the supervision of the caretaker committee, including the planned April 2026 exercise, would amount to a breach of laid-down procedures.

In her ruling, Justice Abdulmalik agreed with the plaintiffs, holding that neither the 1999 Constitution (as amended) nor the ADC constitution empowers a caretaker or interim national leadership to appoint committees to conduct state congresses.

She emphasised that Section 223 of the Constitution mandates political parties to conduct periodic elections based on democratic principles, while Article 23 of the ADC Constitution provides for a maximum of two terms, spanning eight years, for party officers.

The court reaffirmed that while judicial intervention in internal party affairs is limited, it becomes necessary where there is a clear violation of constitutional or statutory provisions.

“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 judge ruled.

Justice Abdulmalik held that evidence before the court established that the tenure of the ADC state executive committees remains valid and must be allowed to run its full course without interference.

She consequently nullified any congress process initiated by the Mark-led caretaker leadership, affirming that only duly elected party structures have the authority to organise such exercises.