Court Upholds Mark-Led Leadership of ADC, Dismisses Abejide's Suit

The Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Musa Liman, has affirmed the leadership of Senator David Mark as the National Chairman of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), dismissing a suit filed by Hon. Leke Abejide. The court held that the suit, challenging the emergence of Mark and Rauf Aregbesola as National Secretary, lacked merit, was non-justiciable as it concerned the internal affairs of a political party, and that Abejide lacked the *locus standi* to institute the action. Furthermore, the court found that Abejide failed to exhaust the party's internal dispute resolution mechanisms. The judgment confirmed that the leadership transition complied with the ADC Constitution and the Electoral Act, 2026, and awarded substantial costs against the plaintiff and his counsel.

The political landscape in Nigeria frequently witnesses internal party disputes, often culminating in protracted legal battles that seek to redefine leadership structures. A recent judgment by the Federal High Court in Abuja has brought a measure of clarity to the leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), a significant opposition party. On July 2, 2026, Justice Musa Liman delivered a pivotal ruling affirming Senator David Mark's leadership of the ADC and dismissing a challenge brought by Hon. Leke Abejide, a member of the House of Representatives.

This decision is crucial not only for the ADC, which has been grappling with internal wrangling, but also for the broader understanding of judicial intervention in the internal affairs of political parties in Nigeria. The court's pronouncements on jurisdiction, *locus standi*, and the exhaustion of internal remedies underscore fundamental principles of electoral jurisprudence. The judgment effectively settles, at least for now, the legitimacy of the Mark-led executive, allowing the party to focus on its political objectives ahead of future elections.

This article will delve into the background of the ADC's leadership crisis, analyze the Federal High Court's reasoning, and discuss the implications of this judgment for political parties and legal practitioners in Nigeria.

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has, for some time, been embroiled in a leadership crisis that saw various factions lay claim to the party's national executive. The dispute intensified following the resignation of the party's former National Chairman, Ralph Nwosu, and the subsequent emergence of Senator David Mark as the National Chairman, with Rauf Aregbesola as the National Secretary. This transition occurred through a stakeholders' meeting on July 2, 2025, which preceded a National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting on July 29, 2025, where the new leadership was formally ratified under the monitoring of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

Hon. Leke Abejide, representing Yagba Federal Constituency in Kogi State, challenged this leadership change in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1637/2025, filed on February 15, 2025. He sought to nullify the handover of leadership, arguing that the process violated the ADC Constitution and the Electoral Act, 2026. Abejide also sought orders restraining Mark and Aregbesola from parading themselves as party leaders and preventing INEC from recognizing them. The defendants in the suit included the ADC, Ralph Nwosu, David Mark, Rauf Aregbesola, and INEC. This particular case was one of several legal challenges that arose from the leadership tussle, with some aspects even reaching the Supreme Court, which had previously reinforced the Mark-led executive pending the final determination of substantive cases at the Federal High Court.

Justice Musa Liman, in his judgment, addressed both preliminary objections raised by the defendants and the substantive issues of the suit. Crucially, the court upheld the preliminary objections, finding that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter. The judge emphasized that disputes concerning the internal administration and leadership of political parties are generally non-justiciable, falling outside the purview of judicial intervention unless there is a clear violation of the law or an infringement of a member's legal rights.

Furthermore, Justice Liman ruled that Hon. Leke Abejide lacked the *locus standi* to institute the suit, as he failed to demonstrate that any of his legal rights had been violated by the emergence of the current leadership. The court also noted Abejide's failure to exhaust the party's internal dispute resolution mechanisms before resorting to litigation, a prerequisite often emphasized by courts in matters pertaining to internal party affairs. These findings align with a long line of judicial precedents that advocate for party autonomy and discourage courts from becoming arbiters of internal political squabbles.

On the substantive issues, the court resolved all three issues in favour of the defendants. Justice Liman specifically held that the transition of leadership from Ralph Nwosu to Senator David Mark and Rauf Aregbesola did not breach either the ADC Constitution or the Electoral Act, 2026. The court clarified that the July 2, 2025, stakeholders' meeting was a legitimate precursor to the National Executive Committee meeting of July 29, 2025, which formally produced Mark and Aregbesola as leaders. The fact that this NEC meeting was monitored by INEC was deemed to lend credibility to the process, affirming the legitimacy of the current leadership.

The judgment also included an order for Abejide to pay litigation costs of N2 million to each of the defendants, and an additional N10 million against his counsel, in line with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026. This imposition of costs serves as a deterrent against what the court might perceive as frivolous or premature litigation in internal party matters. The ruling reinforces the principle that political parties have the primary responsibility for resolving their internal disputes, with judicial intervention reserved for instances of clear statutory or constitutional breaches affecting fundamental rights.

The Federal High Court's decision in *Abejide v. ADC & Ors.* provides significant legal certainty regarding the leadership of the African Democratic Congress. For legal practitioners, this judgment reiterates the critical importance of advising clients on the principles of *locus standi*, the non-justiciability of internal party affairs, and the mandatory exhaustion of internal dispute resolution mechanisms before approaching the courts. It serves as a reminder that courts are generally reluctant to interfere in the domestic management of political parties unless there is a demonstrable breach of law or a clear infringement of a member's fundamental rights.

Moving forward, political parties are encouraged to strengthen their internal governance structures and dispute resolution processes to minimize external judicial intervention. Practitioners should meticulously review party constitutions and relevant electoral laws, such as the Electoral Act, 2026, when advising on leadership challenges. This judgment is a strong signal that the judiciary will uphold party autonomy where due process, as defined by party rules and electoral laws, has been followed. The ADC can now proceed with its activities with a confirmed leadership, potentially reducing the distractions of litigation and allowing it to focus on its political agenda.