The Federal High Court in Abuja has nullified the emergence of former Senate President David Mark and former Minister of Interior Rauf Aregbesola as national officers of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), ruling that their emergence was not shown to have followed the democratic election required by law.
Justice Peter O. Lifu delivered the judgment on November 5, 2026, in a suit instituted by Hon. Nafiu Bala Gombe against the ADC, Mark, Aregbesola, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and Chief Ralph Nwosu.
The court set aside the resolutions of the party’s 99th National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting held on July 29, 2025, through which Mark emerged as National Chairman, Aregbesola as National Secretary and other members of the National Working Committee (NWC) were constituted.
It also restrained INEC from recognising or dealing with the affected persons as national officers of the party and barred them from presenting themselves as members of the ADC’s national leadership.
At the centre of the dispute was whether the party could constitute its national leadership through NEC resolutions and subsequent recognition by INEC without conducting a democratic election.
Gombe, who said he was elected Deputy National Chairman in October 2022 for a four-year tenure, argued that the process through which the new leadership emerged violated the Electoral Act and the ADC Constitution.
He maintained that the party’s leadership changes following the resignation of its former National Chairman and NWC members required compliance with the statutory provisions governing democratic elections.
The defendants, however, argued that Gombe had resigned his position in May 2025 and that the NEC acted within its constitutional powers when it reorganised the party’s leadership.
They also relied on INEC’s attendance at the July 29 meeting, its monitoring report and its subsequent recognition of the outcome.
Court rejects alleged resignation letter
In a major finding, Justice Lifu rejected the resignation letter tendered by the defendants as evidence that Gombe had relinquished his position.
The judge compared the signature on the disputed document with signatures on other documents attributed to Gombe and found material differences in their structure and formation.
The court consequently described the alleged resignation letter, admitted as Exhibit ADC 1, as “fictitious or fabricated”.
Justice Lifu held that certification of a document did not, by itself, establish the authenticity of a disputed signature.
The judge also relied on Section 101 of the Evidence Act and cited judicial authorities in support of the court’s power to compare disputed signatures with those established to be genuine.
The court stressed that its conclusion was based on its examination of the documents and not merely on Gombe’s denial of the signature.
INEC monitoring cannot replace election
The court also rejected the argument that INEC’s participation in the NEC meeting and recognition of its outcome were sufficient to validate the disputed leadership.
Justice Lifu held that notifying the electoral commission of a meeting and conducting a democratic election were separate legal obligations.
He examined Sections 82(1) and 82(3) of the Electoral Act 2022, explaining that compliance with the notice requirement did not automatically establish that party officers had been democratically elected.
The judge said there was no satisfactory evidence that Mark, Aregbesola and the other affected officers emerged from an election in which party members or their duly elected delegates were allowed to vote.
He maintained that a political party’s internal constitutional arrangements could not override mandatory provisions of the Constitution and electoral laws.
The court further held that INEC’s monitoring function could not cure a process that failed to satisfy the statutory requirements.
“Monitoring is an important regulatory function, but it does not confer power to dispense with a mandatory legal requirement,” the judgment stated.
Aregbesola’s counterclaim dismissed
Justice Lifu dismissed Aregbesola’s counterclaim, which challenged Gombe’s membership status and alleged that he had failed to exhaust the party’s internal dispute-resolution procedures.
Aregbesola had sought declaratory reliefs and N50 million in costs.
The court held that the counterclaimant failed to establish an independent legal basis for the reliefs sought.
It also declared that INEC was bound to recognise Gombe as the only elected NWC member whose tenure remained in effect and who was entitled to supervise the party’s affairs.
The court made no order as to costs, noting that the parties belonged to the same political family.
The judgment, however, raises questions about the practical effect of the declaration concerning Gombe, given that his stated four-year tenure was due to expire on October 11, 2026, before the judgment was delivered.
The decision also comes amid the ADC’s preparations for the 2027 general elections, with the court’s orders potentially affecting the party’s leadership and administrative arrangements.
The case was filed as Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, between Hon. Nafiu Bala Gombe and the African Democratic Congress and four others.
The judgment reinforces the principle that political parties must comply with constitutional and statutory requirements for internal democracy, and that administrative recognition by INEC cannot substitute for an election required by law.
You must be logged in to post a comment.