Justice Joyce Abdulmalik also forbade former Senate President David Mark and other party leaders from meddling with the functions and term of lawfully elected state executive committees.
The Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday barred the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising or participating in any congress organised by the African Democratic Congress (ADC)’s disputed caretaker leadership, escalating the party’s internal power struggle.
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik also forbade former Senate President David Mark and other party leaders from meddling with the functions and term of lawfully elected state executive committees.
The decision is the latest escalation in the ADC leadership issue, which has raised concerns over control of party structures ahead of future political actions.
Norman Obinna and six others filed the complaint on behalf of the party’s state chairpersons and executive committees across the nation.
The plaintiffs questioned the validity of activities taken by a caretaker or interim national leadership that sought to convene state congresses through an appointed committee. They claimed that the arrangement was unlawful and lacked a legal basis under the ADC constitution.
They argue that only legally elected party organs had the capacity to convene congresses, and that the caretaker leadership had overstepped its bounds.
They urged the court to maintain existing state leaders’ tenures and prohibit any parallel congressional proceedings that could undermine their positions.
Justice Abdulmalik delivered judgement, ruling that the arguments made were valid and warranted judicial action, particularly in light of suspected violations of both constitutional and party prohibitions.
She presented the primary question as whether the defendants, including David Mark and others, had legal right to assume the responsibilities of elected state organs whose tenure is constitutionally protected by the party’s internal laws.
The judge stated that political parties must follow democratic ideals and respect fixed tenures for elected officials, citing Section 223 of the 1999 Constitution and Article 23 of the ADC Constitution.
While admitting the general notion that courts avoid interfering in internal party issues, Justice Abdulmalik emphasised that this limitation does not apply when there are clear claims of constitutional or statutory violations.
She ruled that when a party complains a violation of its constitution, the court must interfere.
“The argument that this court lacks jurisdiction cannot stand where constitutional breaches are alleged,” she held.
As a result, the court overturned the congress committee’s appointment and barred INEC from accepting any congress held under its authority.
It further prohibited David Mark and the other defendants from organising or managing any congress or convention outside the scope of the party’s constitution.
Furthermore, the court ruled that the current state executive committees’ tenures remain legal and cannot be shortened by parallel arrangements.
The decision effectively confirmed that only elected bodies within the party have the authority to conduct state congresses.
The plaintiffs claimed that the caretaker system breached both the ADC constitution and Section 223 of Nigeria’s Constitution, which requires internal democracy in political parties.