Court restrains INEC from recognising ADC congresses

 

The Federal High Court in Abuja has restrained the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising or participating in any congress organised by a disputed caretaker leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

In a judgment delivered on Wednesday, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik also barred former Senate President David Mark and other key figures in the party from interfering with the functions and tenure of elected state executive committees.

The ruling follows a suit filed by Norman Obinna and six others on behalf of ADC state chairpersons, challenging the legality of a caretaker leadership’s move to organise state congresses through an appointed committee.

The plaintiffs argued that only duly elected party organs, as recognised by the party’s constitution, have the authority to conduct congresses, describing the caretaker arrangement as unconstitutional.

In her decision, Justice Abdulmalik held that the case was “meritorious,” noting that courts can intervene in party matters where constitutional or statutory breaches are alleged.

“The law is settled that courts will not interfere. However, where there is an allegation of breach of constitutional or statutory provisions, the court has a duty to intervene,” she ruled.

The judge found that the appointment of a “congress committee” by the defendants was not recognised under the ADC constitution and therefore invalid.

She held that the tenure of the state executive committees remains valid and must run its full course, adding that only those structures have the authority to organise congresses.

Consequently, the court set aside the appointment of the committee and restrained INEC from recognising any congress conducted under it.

The court also barred Mark and other defendants from organising congresses or taking actions capable of undermining the authority of the elected state executives.

The defendants had argued that the matter was an internal party affair and that the plaintiffs lacked the legal standing to sue, but the court dismissed those objections.