BREAKING: Appeal Court upholds order stopping INEC from recognising ADC state congresses

The Court of Appeal in Abuja has upheld a Federal High Court judgment restraining the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising or participating in any state congresses organised by the African Democratic Congress (ADC) leadership led by David Mark.

In the lead judgment, Justice Okon Abang ruled that “the trial court decision to grant the reliefs sought by the 1st to 7th respondents is in order,” adding that the ADC state chairmen are entitled to a four-year tenure as provided for in the party’s constitution.

The case was filed by seven ADC state chairmen, who represented themselves as well as other state chairmen and state executive committees of the party. They argued that the David Mark-led leadership had no constitutional authority to organise state congresses or appoint congress committees while their elected tenure was still subsisting.

They asked the court to declare that only duly constituted state executive committees could organise state congresses and urged it to restrain INEC from recognising any congress conducted by the party’s interim leadership.

Earlier, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court ruled that the ADC’s elected State Working Committees remained the party’s recognised officials. She held that, under the party’s constitution, they, and not the National Working Committee, have the authority to organise state congresses and manage the party’s affairs at the state level.

David Mark, the party’s National Chairman, and National Secretary Rauf Aregbesola challenged the decision at the Court of Appeal, asking it to set aside the lower court’s ruling.

However, the appellate court agreed with the Federal High Court that the matter was not an internal party affair beyond the court’s jurisdiction.

Justice Donatus Okorowo also held that the appeal lacked merit and affirmed the decision of the lower court.

The Court of Appeal noted that the appellants failed to rely on recent Supreme Court judgments in similar cases involving the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), which confirmed that courts may intervene where political parties violate their own constitutions.

The court further held that the state chairmen were right to approach the Federal High Court because the party’s internal mechanism could not fairly resolve a dispute involving those already in control of its leadership.

The justices concluded that the elected state chairmen remain entitled to complete their four-year tenure under the ADC constitution and that only those recognised party structures have the authority to conduct state congresses.