The supreme court has directed David Mark to return to the
federal high court for the hearing and determination of issues arising from the
leadership dispute within the African Democratic Congress (ADC).
Delivering a unanimous judgment on Thursday, a five-member
panel of the apex court, headed by Mohammed Garba, faulted the order of the
court of appeal which asked parties in the suit to maintain status quo.
The apex court held that the court of appeal acted beyond
its jurisdiction by unilaterally issuing the status quo order.
“Giving such an order in an appeal it had already dismissed
was unnecessary, unwarranted and improper,” the Garba held.
BACKGROUND
The appeal stems from a ruling delivered by the court of
appeal delivered on March 12, which dismissed Mark’s appeal against a September
4 ruling of the federal high court.
At the federal high court, Nafiu Bala, a former
vice-chairman of the ADC, had filed a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, seeking
to stop the Mark-led leadership from parading themselves as national officers
of the ADC.
Bala listed the ADC, Mark, Rauf Aregbesola (national
secretary), the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), and Ralph
Nwosu, the party’s founder and former national chairman, as defendants.
Bala noted that he never resigned his position as national
vice-chairman and argued that he ought to have assumed leadership in line with
the party’s constitution following Nwosu’s exit as national chairman.
He later declared himself national chairman, vowing to
challenge the Mark leadership in court.
In the suit filed on September 2, 2025, Bala is seeking an
order restraining INEC from recognising Mark-led executives and compelling
recognition of himself as acting national chairman.
He also filed motions seeking to stop the party from holding
meetings, congresses, or conventions pending the determination of the suit.
The motion ex parte was heard on September 4, 2025, and
Emeka Nwite, the presiding judge, directed that the respondents, including
INEC, be put on notice to show cause why the motion ex parte should not be
granted.
COURT OF APPEAL
Dissatisfied with an interim ruling, Mark filed an appeal
challenging the jurisdiction of the federal high court to continue to hear
Bala’s suit.
However, on March 12, 2026, the court of appeal dismissed
Mark’s case in its entirety, holding that it was incompetent and unmeritorious.
A three-member panel of the appellate court, led by
Uchechukwu Onyemenam, found that there was no substantive ruling by the federal
high court on the ex parte application, as the trial judge merely ordered that
parties be put on notice.
As such, there was no valid decision upon which an appeal
could properly be anchored.
The court further faulted Mark for relying on an enrolled
order rather than the actual proceedings and ruling of the trial court, noting
that only the judge’s pronouncement constitutes the authentic record of the
court.
The court also held that the appeal arose from an
interlocutory step, for which Mark failed to obtain the required leave before
approaching the appellate court.
On the issue of jurisdiction, the court of appeal noted that
the question was still pending before the federal high court and could not be
determined at the appellate level at that stage, describing the appeal as
premature.
Having dismissed the appeal, the court proceeded to make
preservatory orders aimed at safeguarding the subject matter of the dispute.
The court directed parties to maintain the status quo ante
bellum and refrain from taking any action capable of undermining the
proceedings before the trial court.
The court also ordered an accelerated hearing of the
substantive suit and awarded costs of N2 million against Mark.
Following the verdict of the court of appeal, on April 1,
INEC announced that it would no longer recognise the factions of the ADC led by
Mark or Bala, following its review of the court of appeal judgement.
The commission also said it would refrain from engaging with
both groups or monitoring their meetings, congresses, and conventions.
MARK HEADS TO SUPREME COURT
Dissatisfied with the decision of the appellate court, David
Mark filed an appeal marked SC/CV/180/2026 before the supreme court.
Delivering judgment, the apex court held that the appeal
succeeded in part.
The court agreed with the lower court that the appellants
ought to have sought leave of the trial court before going ahead to file an
appeal since the substantive issues before the trial court were yet to be heard
and determined.
“I find the court below to be right that the appellant, in
whose favour the order of the federal high court was made, ought to have sought
the leave of the court before appeal…” the supreme court held.
However, the court nullified the status quo order issued by
the appellate court and directed all parties to return to the federal high
court for the continuation and determination of the substantive suit.
Advertise on NigerianEye.com to reach thousands of our daily users
No comments
Post a Comment
Kindly drop a comment below.
(Comments are moderated. Clean comments will be approved immediately)
Advert Enquires - Reach out to us at NigerianEye@gmail.com