By Our Reporter
A Federal High Court in Abuja has restrained the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising or participating in any state congresses organised by the disputed caretaker leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).
In a ruling delivered by Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, the court also barred former Senate President David Mark and other party stakeholders from interfering with the functions and tenure of duly elected state executives of the party.
The order followed an originating summons filed by Norman Obinna and six others on behalf of ADC state chairpersons and their executive committees. The plaintiffs challenged the legality of the party’s caretaker or interim national leadership, arguing that it lacks constitutional authority to organise state congresses or set up committees for that purpose.
They urged the court to uphold the legitimacy of the elected state executives and halt any parallel arrangements that could undermine them.
In her ruling, Justice Abdulmalik held that the matter was meritorious and raised key constitutional questions, particularly whether the defendants, including David Mark, possessed the authority to assume powers constitutionally vested in elected state organs of the party.
Citing Section 223 of the 1999 Constitution, which mandates political parties to conduct periodic democratic elections, as well as provisions of the ADC constitution on tenure, the court emphasised that party structures must operate within established legal frameworks.
While acknowledging that courts generally avoid вмешling in the internal affairs of political parties, the judge noted that judicial intervention becomes necessary where there is an alleged breach of constitutional or statutory provisions.
She ruled that the process adopted by the defendants, including the appointment of a “congress committee,” is not recognised by the party’s constitution. Consequently, the court set aside the committee and affirmed that only duly elected state executives have the authority to organise congresses.
The court further restrained INEC from recognising any congress conducted by the said committee and barred the defendants from organising party activities outside constitutional provisions or taking actions capable of undermining the authority of state executives.
Justice Abdulmalik also dismissed preliminary objections raised by the defendants, who had argued that the case involved internal party matters, was non-justiciable, and that the plaintiffs lacked locus standi.
On jurisdiction, the court held that the case falls within its purview since it involves INEC, as provided under Section 251 of the Constitution. The judge also ruled that the plaintiffs had sufficient standing, noting that their claims stem from an alleged violation affecting them collectively.
The ruling is intended to maintain the status quo pending the final determination of the substantive suit.