A federal high court in Abuja has adjourned indefinitely a suit filed by Nafiu Bala, a former deputy national chairman of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), challenging David Mark’s leadership of the party.
In a ruling on Tuesday, Emeka Nwite, the presiding judge, held that it would amount to “judicial rascality” to hear the suit while an interlocutory appeal is still pending before the supreme court.
The judge said the case before the supreme court is one that can dispose of or end the issue at the trial court.
Background
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, lists 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 maintained 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 of the ADC.
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, following which 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.
Mark’s Suit At Appeal Court
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.
The court of appeal directed parties to return to the trial court and maintain the status quo ante bellum pending determination of the suit.
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.
The Case At Supreme Court
In response to INEC’s decision, the Mark-led faction filed an appeal before the apex court, challenging the decision of the appellate court.
On Tuesday, a five-member panel of the supreme court, led by Mohammed Garba, granted an accelerated hearing in the appeal marked SC/CV/180/2026.
The court ordered the Mark-led faction to file and serve legal processes on all respondents within the next 24 hours.
The court added that upon receipt of the processes, the respondents should file their responses within three days.
Also, the apex court held that the appellants have one day to reply to the respondents’ responses, adding that filing and exchange of briefs by the parties must be completed before April 20.
Following the ruling, Jubril Okutepa, counsel to the Mark-led executives, withdrew a motion earlier filed to stay the execution of the court of appeal judgement that ordered the party to maintain the status quo ante bellum.
Okutepa noted that the motion was no longer needed since the apex court had expedited the hearing of the substantive appeal.
With the withdrawal of the motion, the apex court struck it out and fixed April 22 for a hearing.
Federal High Court Adjourns Indefinitely
At the resumed court session on Tuesday, Lukman Fagbemi, counsel to Bala, said an interlocutory appeal arising from the court’s decision on February 13 is now pending before the supreme court.
Fagbemi asked the court to adjourn the case pending the hearing and determination of the appeal by the Mark-led faction.
Responding, Shuaibu Aruwa, counsel to the ADC, argued that the court can proceed with hearing the substantive suit pending the decision of the supreme court before delivering its own judgement.
Aligning with Aruwa’s submission, counsel to Mark said since the order seeking a stay of execution of the appellate court’s ruling has been withdrawn and struck out, there is nothing stopping the trial court from proceeding to hear the substantive suit.
He added that the court can proceed to hear and determine pending applications in the suit while awaiting the supreme court.
“It is proper to tidy up the records by clearing all of the applications pending the hearing of the substantive action, then hear the matter and await the decision of the supreme court. That is the best time management strategy in this case,” Usman said.
Other lawyers in the suit also aligned themselves with Aruwa and Usman.
In his ruling, the judge held that the proper thing to do would be to await the decision of the apex court, noting that the issue there can dispose of or end the matter at the trial court.
“I am of the view, and I so hold, that it would not serve any purpose if the jurisdiction of this honourable court is being challenged at the apex court,” the judge said.
“Therefore, the reasonable thing to do is to await the decision of the supreme court.
“It is my view, and I so hold, that the interest of justice will be met by awaiting the outcome of the decision of the supreme court.
“Indeed, it will be judicial rascality for this court to struggle with the issue of jurisdiction with the supreme court.”
Consequently, the judge adjourned the matter sine die pending the hearing and determination of the appeal at the supreme court.
