Big Trouble for Atiku, ADC as Court Takes Fresh Action on Leadership Suit

The Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed objections raised by Senator David Mark, the National Chairman of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), and the party’s National Secretary, Rauf Aregbesola.

These objections were directed against an application from party chieftain Nafiu Bala Gombe, who sought to amend his leadership suit that is challenging the election of Mark and Aregbesola as national officers of the party.

Justice Peter Lifu delivered the ruling on Friday, characterizing the objections from Mark and Aregbesola as “frivolous, baseless, and without an iota of merit.”

He emphasized that the amendment requested by Gombe is a typical procedure in civil litigation that aims to prevent miscarriages of justice. The need for this amendment arose following a change of counsel for Gombe.

The judge added that the fears expressed by the defendants were unnecessary because they remained free to file counter-affidavits in response to the amended originating summons.

After reviewing the objections, Justice Lifu said he found no basis for the claim that the defendants would be prejudiced by the amendment. He consequently dismissed the objections, granted Gombe’s application to amend his suit and ordered David Mark and Rauf Aregbesola to pay N500,000 in costs to the plaintiff.

The case is part of the ongoing leadership crisis within the ADC that followed the emergence of David Mark as national chairman and Aregbesola as national secretary after the party’s leadership restructuring.

Gombe, a former Deputy National Chairman of the ADC, is challenging their emergence, arguing that it violated the party’s constitution and the Electoral Act. He is seeking a court order restraining Mark, Aregbesola and others from parading themselves as the party’s leaders.

The leadership dispute has generated several court cases in recent months. The Court of Appeal had earlier ordered parties to maintain the status quo, prompting the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to temporarily withdraw recognition of the Mark-led leadership. However, the Supreme Court later set aside the appellate court’s order, directed that the substantive case be heard on an accelerated basis and INEC subsequently restored the David Mark-led leadership on its records while the suit continued before the Federal High Court.

During Friday’s proceedings, Gombe, through his counsel, Lukman Fagbemi, SAN, argued that he was entitled under the law to amend his originating summons before judgment. He maintained that the proposed amendments were necessary to ensure justice and were supported by law.

Mark’s lawyer, Dr. Suleiman Umar, SAN, opposed the application, arguing that the parties had already joined issues and that allowing fresh amendments would hand the plaintiff an unfair advantage after he had seen the defendants’ legal arguments. He urged the court to reject the request, describing it as contrary to the principles of natural justice.

Aregbesola, through his counsel, Realwan Okpanachi, also opposed the application, contending that the amendments changed the character of the suit by introducing new claims and documents. He argued that the ADC National Executive Committee lawfully changed the party’s leadership on July 29, 2025, during a properly convened meeting after notice had been served on INEC on July 1 as required by law.

Aregbesola further claimed that Gombe initially attached an unsigned copy of the ADC Constitution to his suit but later introduced a signed copy after seeing the defendants’ objections in a bid to strengthen his case. Insisting that “he who comes to equity must come with clean hands,” he urged the court to dismiss the amendment, arguing that it was filed in bad faith and amounted to an abuse of court process.

Justice Lifu, however, rejected those arguments, ruling that the proposed amendments would not prejudice the defendants and should be allowed in the interest of justice as the substantive leadership battle within the ADC continues before the court.