Three members of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) have dragged the party and several of its key figures to the Federal High Court in Abuja, seeking to nullify the appointment of Senator David Mark and others as members of the party’s interim leadership.
In the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1328, the plaintiffs — Adeyemi Emmanuel, Ayodeji Victor Tolu, and Haruna Ismaila — who said they are ADC members, contended that the appointment of Mark as interim national chairman, former Osun State Governor Rauf Aregbesola as interim national secretary, and former sports minister Bolaji Abdullahi as interim national publicity secretary violates the provisions of the ADC’s 2018 constitution (as amended) and a subsisting court judgment.
They are asking the court to declare the interim leadership unconstitutional, unlawful, and null and void.
The ADC, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), and the immediate past National Chairman of the party, Ralphs Nwosu, were listed as 1st, 2nd, and 3rd defendants, respectively.
Senator Mark, Aregbesola, and Abdullahi are listed as the 4th, 5th, and 6th defendants.
The plaintiffs posed several legal questions for the court to determine, among them, “Whether or not the appointment of the 4th, 5th, and 6th Defendants as Interim National Chairman, National Secretary, and National Publicity Secretary of the 1st Defendant was made in breach of the provisions of the ADC Constitution, 2018 (as amended).”
They further questioned whether the party’s constitution even allows for the creation of interim leadership positions, noting that the ADC is an already registered and operational political party — not a newly formed entity.
“The constitution of the 1st defendant makes no provision for interim national officers,” the plaintiffs argued in their filing.
“Any such appointment must flow from a valid National Convention or decision of the National Executive Committee.”
They also challenged the legitimacy of the defendants’ membership status in the party, stating, “The 4th, 5th, and 6th Defendants were never properly registered as ADC members before their appointments and are therefore ineligible to hold party office under the ADC Constitution.”
The plaintiffs also cited a Federal High Court judgment delivered on December 21, 2022, by Justice Binta Nyako, which they claim was violated when Ralphs Nwosu allegedly handed over the party’s structure without due process.
“The handover of the ADC’s leadership to persons from a newly created coalition is in direct violation of the subsisting judgment of this Honourable Court,” they submitted.
The claimants asked the court to issue the following declarations: That the appointment of the 4th, 5th, and 6th defendants is unconstitutional and invalid;
That their positions are contrary to the spirit and letter of the ADC Constitution;
That INEC should not recognise them as officers of the party.
No date has been fixed for the hearing of the matter.
THE WHISTLER reports that this legal action comes on the heels of the adoption of the ADC by the coalition of opposition forces led by former Vice President Atiku Abubakar to challenge President Bola Tinubu in the 2027 general election.
Following the announcement, the ADC’s founding National Chairman, Ralphs Nwosu, announced the dissolution of existing party structures and the adoption of a new interim leadership to steer the coalition.
In reaction, however, some longstanding ADC members decried the move as a hostile takeover masked as a merger.
Speaking, one party official described the ongoing power struggle as “an attempt to hijack the party by political heavyweights who were never part of our vision.”
“We built this party from scratch, and now a few powerful names want to sweep in, dissolve our organs, and run away with the structure. This cannot stand,” the official said.
Another senior member of the party, who supports the lawsuit, added, “This is not about opposing Atiku or any coalition. It’s about the principle of internal democracy. You can’t just appoint outsiders into sensitive party positions without following due process.”
