ABUJA — The protracted legal battle over the leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) took a dramatic and complicated turn on Friday as the Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Emeka Nwite, ordered an indefinite adjournment (sine die) of the suit. The decision comes on the heels of a fresh Supreme Court judgment and a controversial administrative request by the plaintiff to have the case transferred to a different judge.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, was initiated by Mr. Nafiu-Bala Gombe, the former National Deputy Chairman of the ADC. Gombe is challenging the legality of the current party leadership, specifically contesting the emergence of Senator David Mark and Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola as key figures within the party’s hierarchy.
Friday’s proceedings were marked by high-stakes legal arguments centered on two primary issues: the recent intervention of the apex court and an administrative letter written by the plaintiff to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice John Tsoho.
The plaintiff’s counsel, Luka Haruna, SAN, informed the court that the Supreme Court had, on April 30, 2026, delivered a judgment regarding an interlocutory appeal filed by the second defendant, Senator David Mark. According to Haruna, the apex court dismissed Mark’s appeal for lacking merit and set aside a previous Court of Appeal order that had stayed proceedings in the lower court.
However, a procedural vacuum emerged when it became clear that neither the plaintiff nor the defendants had yet obtained the Certified True Copy (CTC) of the Supreme Court’s judgment. Without this formal document, Justice Nwite noted that the court could not officially take notice of the apex court's directives or the specific nuances of its ruling.
The atmosphere in the courtroom sharpened when Haruna revealed that his client had written to Chief Judge John Tsoho on May 4, requesting that the case be reassigned to another judge. This disclosure met with fierce resistance from the star-studded defense team, which includes notable legal figures representing the five defendants: the ADC, Senator David Mark, Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), and Chief Ralph Nwosu.
Justice Nwite expressed concern over the "secretive" nature of the transfer request. It was revealed during the hearing that the letter sent to the Chief Judge had not been served on the defendants, leaving them in the dark regarding the grounds upon which Gombe was seeking a new judge.
> “Taking a decision or any action on such letter without hearing from the defendants will amount to breach of their fundamental rights in this suit,” Justice Nwite remarked during his ruling.
>
The judge further clarified that since the letter was addressed to the administrative head of the court (the Chief Judge), he lacked the jurisdiction to make a ruling on its merits. Instead, he maintained that the court must wait for a formal directive from the Chief Judge’s office.
The defense counsel did not mince words in their opposition to the transfer request. Rilwan Okpanachi, counsel for the ADC, characterized the move as an "ambush" designed to frustrate the judicial process.
Okpanachi corrected the plaintiff’s narrative regarding the Supreme Court’s recent outing, noting that while the interlocutory appeal might have been dismissed, the apex court sustained and upheld an order for an accelerated hearing originally made by the Court of Appeal. He argued that the plaintiff’s attempt to change judges was a strategic delay tactic.
"We make bold to say that a litigant is not allowed to choose which court his own case should be decided in," Okpanachi stated. He further noted that the very fact that the plaintiff was seeking a transfer despite no negative rulings having been made by Justice Nwite actually served to confirm the integrity of this court.
Suleiman Usman, SAN, representing Senator David Mark, echoed these sentiments, describing the private correspondence with the Chief Judge as a "disturbing and dangerous trend." He reaffirmed his client's absolute confidence in Justice Nwite’s impartiality and urged the court not to allow administrative maneuvers to derail the pursuit of justice.
At the heart of this legal firestorm is a fundamental disagreement over the internal democracy of the ADC. The plaintiff, Nafiu-Bala Gombe, alleges that the transition of power from the former National Chairman, Ralph Nwosu, to the leadership involving David Mark and Rauf Aregbesola was a flagrant breach of the party’s constitution and the Electoral Act.
Gombe’s suit seeks to nullify the current leadership structure, arguing that it lacks the legal foundation required by both party guidelines and national electoral laws. The inclusion of INEC as a defendant underscores the potential impact this case could have on the ADC’s participation in future elections and its standing as a registered political entity.
By adjourning the matter sine die, Justice Nwite has effectively put the case in a state of suspended animation. The resumption of the trial now hinges on three critical factors: the formal filing of the CTC of the Supreme Court judgment; the proper service of the transfer request letter to the defendants; and the final administrative directive from Chief Judge John Tsoho.
For the ADC, a party that has attempted to position itself as a viable alternative in Nigeria’s political landscape, this indefinite delay prolongs a period of leadership uncertainty. With the Supreme Court reportedly calling for an accelerated hearing, the current administrative and procedural hurdles present a significant irony, leaving the party’s rank-and-file in a state of flux as they await the next move from the Federal High Court’s leadership.
As of Friday afternoon, the parties exited the courtroom with no clear date for return, leaving the future of the ADC leadership to be decided in the corridors of judicial administration rather than the witness stand.
