The African Democratic Congress (ADC) and its interim national secretary Rauf Aregbesola on Monday asked Judge Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja to withdraw from a suit concerning the party’s leadership dispute.
Accusing the the judge of bias, they urged him to send the suit to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court for reassignment to another judge.
|
|
The suit was filed by Nafiu-Bala Gombe, a member of the ADC laying claim to be the authentic chair of the party.
In the suit, Mr Gombe sued the ADC, the party’s interim national chairperson, David Mark; interim national secretary, Mr Aregbesola; the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and Ralph Nwosu.
|
|
|
|---|
Mr Gombe, an official of the party before a wave of defection to the party led to a change in its leadership composition, is challenging the process that produced Mr Mark and Mr Aregbesola as national chairman and national secretary of the party. He argues that their emergence was unlawful and contrary to the party’s constitution.
He asked the court to nullify their appointments and restrain them from parading themselves as leaders of the party.
Mr Gombe opposed the applications for the judge to withdraw from the suit and asked the court to continue hearing the matter.
The case, initially before Judge Emeka Nwite of the same court, went to the Supreme Court, later returned to the Federal High Court and reassigned to Judge Lifu for adjudication.
Monday’s hearing
After hearing parties on Monday, the judge noted that more than 20 applications were before the court. The applications included preliminary objections and motions for recusal.
The judge also noted that the case had gone to the Supreme Court and returned before it was assigned to him.
Mr Lifu observed that most of the defence’s applications centred on requests for him to withdraw from the matter. He therefore decided to hear all the motions for withdrawal.
While moving the motion for recusal, ADC’s lawyer, Shaibu Aruwa, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), noted that his own application was filed on 2 June.
The senior lawyer said the motion sought an order directing the judge to withdraw from the suit and return the case file to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court John Tsoho for reassignment.
He urged the court to grant the application in the interest of justice.
Also moving his motion, Realwan Okpanachi, who appeared for Mr Aregbesola, said his client motion for recusal was filed on 2 June and urged the court to grant it.
But Mark’s lawyer, Suleiman Usman, did not move any recusal application, and did not say anything about it.
Also, Adamu Bello, who appeared for the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), said the commission was not seeking the judge’s withdrawal and had no such motion before the court.
Mr Nwosu, too, did not ask the judge to withdraw.
Meanwhile, Kalu-Kalu Agu, who appeared for Nkemakolam Ukandu, the National Welfare Secretary of ADC seeking to join the suit as a party, noted that he had a motion for recusal and also sought an order staying further proceedings pending the hearing of his client’s petition against the judge and the Chief Judge of the court.
He also referred to a pending suit at the Federal High Court against the National Judicial Council (NJC’) the Chief Judge, and Judge Lifu.
He said Mr Ukandu maintained that he could not get justice in the matter if it was handled by certain judges, including “James Omotosho, Abdulmalik, and Lifu”.
Recall that while the case was still pending, reports earlier this month showed that Mr Ukandu filed a separate suit against the NJC, the Chief Judge and Judge Lifu over the reassignment of the leadership case. The suit cited a petition that reportedly accused the judges of bias and abuse of judicial powers.
Mr Ukandu, who sought to join the main suit filed by Mr Gombe, argued that the reassignment of the case from Judge Nwite to Mr Lifu violated an earlier Supreme Court directive which, according to him, returned the matter to Mr Nwite for continuation of proceedings.
When the judge asked Mr Ukandu’s lawyer on Monday when the petition was filed, he said it was filed on 2 June, prompting the judge to express surprise that it was filed before his court assumed jurisdiction in the matter.
Requests for dismissal of recusal request
However, Mr Gombe urged the court to hear the case and dismiss the motions seeking the judge’s withdrawal.
The applicant, through his lawyer Lukman Fagbemi also SAN, said the defendants failed to place evidence before the court to justify the applications.
Mr Fagbemi made the argument while responding to the motions filed by Messrs Aruwa for the ADC and Okpanachi for Aregbesola.
He urged the court to dismiss the applications and also asked the court to discountenance Mr Ukandu’s motion for recusal.
Mr Fagbemi said counter-affidavits had been filed in response to the defence motions.
He added that the judge had not taken evidence, made any pronouncement, or shown any opinion that could suggest bias.
He added that the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/2026, which allegedly formed the basis of the petition, was separate from the present case, while the existence of a petition alone could not prove bias or lack of impartiality.
He also said the defendants failed to show any personal interest or conduct suggesting partiality. He described claims that the court would not deliver justice as speculative and unsupported.
After hearing the parties, Mr Lifu held that Mr Ukandu was not yet a party in the suit. The judge said his motion for joinder had not been heard. He pointed out that he “cannot hear a prospective joinder who is not a party in the suit”.
He adjourned the matter until 16 June for a composite ruling on the recusal motions filed by the ADC and Mr Aregbesola and for further hearing.
Backstory
Mr Gombe had challenged Mr Mark’s leadership of the ADC.
The leadership crisis in the party began after the resignation of the party’s former executives led by Mr Nwosu and the emergence of a new National Working Committee led by Mr Mark on 29 July 2025.
The development triggered a legal challenge when Mr Gombe, a former vice-national chairperson of the party, filed a suit at the Federal High Court in Abuja seeking recognition as the party’s rightful leader under its constitution.
INEC was joined as the fourth defendant in the suit.
While the case was pending, the initial judge, Mr Nwite ordered all parties to maintain the status quo pending the determination of the substantive suit.
The Court of Appeal later dismissed an interlocutory appeal filed by the Mr Mark-led faction and ordered all parties, including INEC, to maintain the status quo earlier ordered by the lower court pending further determination of the matter.
Following the ruling, INEC received letters from both factions on 16 March.
The Mark-led faction asked the commission not to recognise Mr Gombe and to maintain its position pending resolution of the dispute, while the Mr Gombe faction asked INEC to give effect to the Court of Appeal judgment of 12 March in its favour.
INEC later removed the names of Mr Mark as national chairman and Rauf Aregbesola as national secretary from its website on 1 April, saying it would not recognise any faction pending the resolution of the legal disputes.
The dispute later escalated into a protest in Abuja, where party members accused INEC of bias and warned that the handling of the crisis threatened internal democracy within the party.
While the substantive hearing at the Federal High Court unfolded, Mr Mark and his group proceeded to the Supreme Court to challenge the Court of Appeal’s ruling.
On 14 April, Judge Nwite adjourned the hearing indefinitely to await the decision of the Supreme Court.
On 30 April, a five-member panel of the Supreme Court led by Justice Lawal Garba ruled in favour of Mr Mark’s appeal, setting aside an order of the Court of Appeal which asked all parties to the dispute to maintain the status quo antebellum.
READ ALSO: 2027: Dele Momodu lobbies ADC to consider him as Atiku’s running mate
However, the Supreme Court directed that pending processes before the lower court be determined in accordance with the law.
Based on the Supreme Court judgement, INEC accorded recognition to the Mark leadership.
But Mr Gombe later, on 8 May, sought a transfer of the suit from Mr Nwite’s court to another judge to guarantee judicial impartiality.
The case was later reassigned to Mr Lifu, whom the defence has again asked to withdraw.
Speaking to journalists after Monday’s proceedings, one of the respondent’s lawyers, Mr Okpanachi, explained that the applicant had slowed down the accelerated hearing in the case by asking the initial judge to withdraw from the case.
