Court shocks ADC: Justice Joyce Abdulmalik bars INEC, nullifies congress plans
Court halts ADC congresses, bars INEC recognition
A major political development has emerged ahead of Nigeria’s 2027 elections, as the Federal High Court in Abuja delivered a decisive ruling that could reshape the internal dynamics of the African Democratic Congress (ADC). In a judgment that underscores the importance of constitutional order within political parties, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik barred the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising any congress organised by a disputed caretaker leadership within the party.
The ruling has intensified the ongoing leadership crisis in the ADC, raising questions about party structure, legitimacy, and compliance with democratic principles.
Court Declares ADC Caretaker Actions Invalid
Delivering judgment, Justice Abdulmalik ruled that the caretaker leadership allegedly led by former Senate President David Mark lacks the constitutional authority to organise state congresses or appoint committees for that purpose.
The court found that such actions violated both the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and the internal constitution of the ADC. According to the ruling, only duly elected party organs have the legal mandate to conduct congresses.
The judge emphasised that any deviation from established constitutional procedures is invalid, effectively nullifying the congress committee set up by the caretaker leadership.
INEC Restrained from Recognising ADC Congresses
In one of the most significant aspects of the ruling, the court explicitly restrained INEC from recognising or participating in any congress organised by the disputed leadership.
This directive has immediate implications, as it halts any attempt to legitimise parallel party structures or processes that do not comply with constitutional provisions.
By doing so, the court reinforced the principle that electoral bodies must operate within the framework of legality and due process, especially in politically sensitive matters.
State Executives’ Tenure Upheld by Court
Justice Abdulmalik also ruled that the tenure of ADC State Executive Committees remains valid and must be allowed to run its full course.
The court held that these elected structures are the only legitimate bodies empowered to organise state congresses. This decision effectively protects existing state leadership from interference by any caretaker or interim committee.
The judgment further clarified that political party leadership cannot arbitrarily override elected officials, as doing so undermines internal democracy and party stability.
READ ALSO
ADC crisis deepens as Nafiu Bala leads protest to INEC, demands recognition over David Mark faction
Legal Basis: Constitution and Party Guidelines
In her reasoning, the judge relied heavily on Section 223 of the Nigerian Constitution, which mandates political parties to operate on democratic principles through periodic elections.
Additionally, Article 23 of the ADC Constitution was cited, which stipulates that party officers serve a maximum of two terms spanning eight years.
The court reiterated that while it generally avoids interfering in internal party matters, it has a duty to intervene when there is clear evidence of constitutional or statutory violations.
Background: ADC Leadership Crisis Deepens
The case originated from a suit filed by aggrieved party members representing state chairmen and executive committees across Nigeria.
The plaintiffs challenged the legality of the caretaker leadership’s actions, arguing that the appointment of a congress committee and planned state congresses violated party rules.
They also warned that such actions could destabilise the party ahead of the 2027 elections, a concern the court appeared to validate through its ruling.
Implications for 2027 Elections and Party Politics
This ruling is expected to have far-reaching consequences for the ADC and Nigeria’s broader political landscape.
By invalidating the caretaker-led congress plans, the court has effectively restored authority to elected state executives, ensuring that future party activities align with constitutional provisions.
Political analysts suggest that the judgment could influence party alliances, candidate selection processes, and internal cohesion as preparations for the 2027 elections intensify.
FAQ
What did the court rule about ADC congresses?
The Federal High Court ruled that any congress organised by the ADC caretaker leadership is invalid and barred INEC from recognising such processes.
Why did the court stop INEC from recognising ADC congresses?
The court found that the caretaker leadership lacked constitutional authority to organise congresses, making any such process illegal.
Who is Justice Joyce Abdulmalik?
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik is a Federal High Court judge in Nigeria who delivered the ruling on the ADC leadership dispute.
What is the ADC leadership crisis about?
The crisis involves disputes between elected state executives and a caretaker leadership over control of party structures and congress organisation.
Can ADC still conduct congresses after the ruling?
Yes, but only through constitutionally recognised and elected party structures, not through caretaker-appointed committees.
What does this mean for the 2027 elections?
The ruling could impact candidate selection, party unity, and alliances, potentially shaping the ADC’s role in the 2027 elections.
What law did the court rely on?
The court relied on Section 223 of the 1999 Constitution and provisions within the ADC constitution.
Does the court usually interfere in party matters?
Generally no, but it intervenes when there is a clear violation of constitutional or statutory provisions.
Who filed the lawsuit against the ADC leadership?
Aggrieved members representing state chairmen and executive committees of the party filed the suit.
What happens next for ADC?
The party must reorganise its processes in line with its constitution, with elected structures retaining authority over congresses.