COURT BARS INEC FROM RECOGNISING ADC CONGRESSES CONDUCTED BY MARK-LED COMMITTEE
Read Time:2 Minute, 46 Second
By; Ganiyat Sunmola
The Federal High Court in Abuja has restrained the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising or taking part in any state congresses organised by the disputed caretaker leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).
Delivering judgment, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik also barred former Senate President David Mark and other members of the party’s interim leadership from interfering with the duties and tenure of the ADC’s elected state executive committees.
The ruling followed a suit filed by Norman Obinna and six others on behalf of ADC state chairpersons and executive committee members. The plaintiffs challenged the legality of the party’s caretaker leadership, arguing that it lacked constitutional authority to organise state congresses or appoint committees for that purpose.
They asked the court to affirm the legitimacy of the elected state executives and stop what they described as unconstitutional parallel structures capable of undermining internal democracy within the party.
In her judgment, Justice Abdulmalik held that the issues raised by the plaintiffs were valid and deserving of judicial consideration.
The judge stated that the main issue before the court was whether the defendants, including Senator David Mark, had the constitutional or statutory powers to assume responsibilities reserved for elected state party organs whose tenure is protected by the ADC constitution.
She referenced Section 223 of the 1999 Constitution, which requires political parties to conduct democratic elections periodically, as well as Article 23 of the ADC constitution, which provides that party officers can only serve a maximum of two terms of eight years.
According to the court, the appointment of a “congress committee” by the defendants and the convening of meetings for state congresses raised constitutional concerns because such a structure is not recognised under the ADC constitution.
Justice Abdulmalik acknowledged that courts generally avoid interfering in internal party affairs but stressed that judicial intervention becomes necessary where constitutional or statutory breaches are alleged.
“Where a party alleges that its constitution has been violated, the court is bound to adjudicate,” she ruled.
The court further held that political parties must strictly adhere to their constitutions, adding that only duly elected party structures have the authority to organise state congresses.
Consequently, the court nullified the appointment of the disputed committee and restrained INEC from recognising any congresses conducted by it.
The ruling also barred David Mark and other defendants from organising congresses or conventions outside the provisions of the ADC constitution or taking actions capable of undermining elected state executives.
The defendants in the suit include the ADC, David Mark, Patricia Akwashiki, Bolaji Abdullahi, Rauf Aregbesola, Oserheimen Osunbor, and INEC.
The plaintiffs had argued that the tenure of ADC state executive committees remains valid until fresh congresses are properly conducted in line with the party constitution, warning that bypassing them would weaken internal democracy.
However, the defendants urged the court to dismiss the suit, arguing that it involved internal party matters, that the plaintiffs lacked legal standing, and that the case was incompetent.
Before delivering judgment, Justice Abdulmalik dismissed the preliminary objections, ruling that the Federal High Court has jurisdiction over the matter because it relates to INEC’s constitutional functions.
She also rejected claims that the plaintiffs failed to exhaust internal dispute resolution procedures, stating that such arguments could not override the substantive constitutional issues raised in the suit.
Happy
0 %
Sad
0 %
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
0 %
Surprise
0 %
0
0