Groups Warn Against Judicial Interference in ADC Leadership, Demand NJC Action
Elochukwu Benjamin |Ichie Times
The Coalition Against Corruption and Bad Governance (CACOBAG) and the Campaign for Democracy and Justice (CDJ) have condemned the Federal High Court judgement which purportedly sacked the Senator David Mark-led National Working Committee of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), describing it as conflicting with an earlier subsisting judgement of a court of coordinate jurisdiction.
The two pro-democracy organisations, in a joint statement on Friday, signed by the Acting Secretary of CDJ, Kolawole Bello, and Chairman of CACOBAG, Toyin Raheem, said the judgement delivered by Justice Peter Lifu on November 5, 2026, in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, amounted to an abuse of court process and could undermine Nigeria’s multiparty democracy.
The organisations argued that the judgement, which reportedly nullified the actions of the David Mark-led NWC, including the emergence of former Vice President Atiku Abubakar as the ADC’s presidential candidate for the 2027 general election, contradicted an earlier ruling by Justice Musa Liman of the same Federal High Court.
According to the groups, Justice Liman, in a judgement delivered on July 2, 2026, in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1637/2025, had affirmed the legitimacy of the David Mark-led leadership, dismissed the challenge to it on grounds of jurisdiction, locus standi and failure to exhaust internal party remedies, and directed the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to recognise the leadership.
They maintained that the earlier judgement remained subsisting, having not been set aside by either the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court, arguing that another judge of equal jurisdiction lacked the authority to overturn it.
Describing the development as a threat to judicial authority and democratic stability, CACOBAG and CDJ cited several Supreme Court decisions to support their position that courts of coordinate jurisdiction could not sit on appeal over the decisions of one another.
They also argued that the principles of res judicata, issue estoppel and stare decisis prohibited the re-litigation of matters already determined by a competent court.
The groups warned that allowing conflicting judgements on the same subject matter could erode public confidence in the judiciary and create uncertainty in the country’s political system.
They consequently called on the National Judicial Council (NJC), under the leadership of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, to investigate the circumstances surrounding the conflicting judgements and address what they described as the growing abuse of court processes through forum shopping.
The organisations also urged Atiku Abubakar and the ADC to approach the Court of Appeal to challenge the November 5 judgement.
They further called on the United Action for Democracy (UAD) and other pro-democracy organisations to mobilise in defence of multiparty democracy, insisting that political contests should be determined through free and fair elections rather than judicial interventions that could undermine opposition parties.
The statement also questioned what it described as attempts to use the judiciary to restrict major political contenders ahead of the 2027 presidential election, listing Atiku Abubakar, Adewole Adebayo, Omoyele Sowore, Hashim Olawepo-Hashim, Seyi Makinde and Peter Obi among the prominent political figures in the race.
The groups recalled the sacrifices of pro-democracy activists in the struggle for political pluralism, warning that the gains of that struggle must not be undermined.
They insisted that the November 5 judgement must not stand, urging the judiciary to protect its independence and preserve public confidence in the country’s democratic institutions.
