The factional National Chairman of the African Democratic Congress, Nafiu Bala Gombe, has commended the Federal High Court for what he described as its independent, impartial and courageous handling of the party’s leadership dispute.
Bala, in a statement on Thursday reacting to the judgment in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, involving him, the ADC and four others, praised the trial judge for determining the case based on constitutional and statutory provisions rather than political considerations.
He described the dispute as politically sensitive and nationally significant, saying it raised important issues bordering on party autonomy, internal democracy, constitutional compliance and the regulatory responsibilities of INEC.
“With profound respect for the Bench, and with a deep sense of duty to the administration of justice in Nigeria, I most respectfully commend the Federal High Court and the trial judge for the independent, impartial and intellectually rigorous manner in which His Lordship handled and determined the above-referenced matter,” he said.
Bala said the judgment reinforced the principle that political parties must operate within the provisions of their constitutions and the Electoral Act.
“By subjecting the question of leadership emergence to constitutional and statutory scrutiny, rather than political expediency, His Lordship affirmed a foundational principle of Nigerian jurisprudence: political parties are not above their own constitutions, and the Electoral Act is not a mere suggestion,” he stated.
He argued that courts had a responsibility to intervene where political parties failed to comply with their established rules and procedures, adding that such intervention was necessary to protect democracy and uphold the rule of law.
“Where a party’s constitution prescribes a procedure for succession and leadership, that procedure must be obeyed. Where a political party fails to comply with the rules, procedures and constitutional provisions laid down for its own governance, the court is duty-bound to intervene to safeguard democracy, uphold the rule of law and prevent anarchy,” he said.
The Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Peter Lifu, had on Thursday nullified the leadership of the ADC led by former Senate President David Mark and invalidated decisions taken by the leadership, including the party’s presidential primary that produced former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar as its candidate for the 2027 general elections.
The court also nullified the emergence of former Minister of Interior, Rauf Aregbesola, as the party’s National Secretary, as well as the appointments of other national officers and the nominations of candidates presented by the party for the 2027 elections.
Justice Lifu held that the emergence of the Mark-led leadership violated the ADC constitution, relevant provisions of the Electoral Act and the 1999 Constitution. The court also ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission not to recognise or act on decisions taken at the party’s 99th National Executive Committee meeting held on July 27, 2025.
The judgment followed a suit instituted by Bala, a former Deputy National Chairman of the ADC for the North-East, who challenged the process through which Mark and other members of the caretaker committee assumed control of the party.
The dispute followed the resignation of the party’s former National Chairman, Ralph Nwosu, after which Mark and other members of the caretaker committee emerged as the party’s interim leaders.
Bala argued that, by virtue of his position as Deputy National Chairman, North-East, he was constitutionally entitled to assume the party’s leadership following Nwosu’s resignation.
He consequently approached the court to challenge the emergence of Mark as National Chairman and Aregbesola as National Secretary, arguing that their emergence violated the ADC constitution and provisions of the Electoral Act.
The suit listed the ADC, the Independent National Electoral Commission, Mark, Aregbesola and Nwosu as the first to fifth defendants, respectively.
The substantive judgment followed earlier proceedings in which the interlocutory aspect of the dispute went up to the Supreme Court, which directed that the matter return to the trial court for determination of the substantive issues.
Commenting further, Bala said the judgment was significant beyond the immediate interests of the parties involved, noting that it demonstrated the judiciary’s capacity to decide politically sensitive matters without external influence.
According to him, the decision would restore public confidence in the judiciary and reinforce the principle that political leadership must emerge through lawful and constitutionally recognised processes.
“It restores public confidence that a judge can still decide on the law and the facts alone, uninfluenced by political pressure, media commentary or the weight of personalities involved in the suit.
“It affirms that leadership must emerge through lawful process, not through imposition, and that aggrieved members have a legitimate right to seek redress in court rather than resort to self-help,” he added.
Bala also commended the judge for demonstrating what he described as patience, erudition and firmness in handling a politically sensitive matter.
Citing the judicial principle that justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done, he said the judge’s conduct reflected the standard expected of an independent judiciary.
He further praised his legal team for their diligence, professionalism and commitment throughout the proceedings.
“I also wish to place on record my profound commendation to our team of lawyers for their exceptional diligence, intellectual rigour and unwavering commitment to the cause of justice. Their professionalism, perseverance and fidelity to the rule of law were instrumental in ensuring that justice was not only sought, but seen to be done,” he said.
The ADC chairman also expressed appreciation to his supporters across the country for their solidarity, loyalty and prayers during the legal battle.
