A FEDERAL High Court in Abuja has restrained the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising or participating in any congress organised by the disputed caretaker leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).
In a judgment delivered on Wednesday, April 29, Joyce Abdulmalik also barred former Senate President David Mark and other senior figures in the party from interfering with the duties and tenure of elected state executives.
The judgement arose from a suit filed by Norman Obinna and six others, representing ADC state chairmen and executive committees across the country.
They challenged the legitimacy of the caretaker or interim national leadership, especially its decision to set up a committee to conduct state congresses.
They asked the court to affirm the tenure of the state executive committees and stop any parallel arrangements capable of weakening their authority.
In her ruling, Abdulmalik described the originating summons as meritorious and said the major issue was whether Mark and other defendants had the legal authority to take over the functions of elected ADC state organs whose tenure is protected by the party’s constitution.
The ruling comes barely 24 hours after the Mark-led faction of the ADC appealed to the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, to hasten the Supreme Court’s judgment on the party’s lingering leadership dispute, warning that any further delay could threaten its participation in the 2027 general elections.
In a letter dated April 28, 2026, and signed by its counsel, S.E. Aruwa, a senior advocate, the faction said the unresolved appeal before the apex court could leave the party without recognised leadership and jeopardise its constitutional right to contest the next general election.
The faction argued that the delay had created uncertainty, especially after INEC allegedly began acting on the judgment of the lower court by withdrawing recognition of the ADC leadership.
According to the letter, the development followed Appeal No. CA/ABJ/145/2026, which sought to de-recognise the party leadership, creating what it described as a leadership vacuum despite the ADC remaining a registered political party.
The Mark-led faction warned that with INEC’s revised timetable for the 2027 elections already in motion, the party risked being excluded from the electoral process if the Supreme Court failed to deliver judgment quickly.
Meanwhile, in Wednesday’s judgment, Abdulmalik ruled that the caretaker leadership lacked constitutional authority to organise state congresses or appoint a congress committee.
She held that only duly elected party organs recognised by the ADC constitution had the power to conduct such congresses and affirmed that the tenure of the state executive committees remained valid.
The court therefore set aside the appointment of the congress committee and restrained INEC from recognising any congress organised by it.
The judge relied on Section 223 of the 1999 Constitution, which requires political parties to conduct periodic elections based on democratic principles, as well as Article 23 of the ADC Constitution, which states that national and state officers can only serve a maximum of two terms spanning eight years.
She said the court needed to determine whether Mark and the other defendants acted outside the law by convening meetings and creating a congress committee to organise state congresses.
It also barred Mark and other defendants from organising congresses or conventions outside the provisions of the ADC constitution or taking steps capable of undermining the authority of the state executive committees.
