Members of the National Working Committee (NWC) of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) led by former Senate President David Mark, staged a protest today at the Federal High Court in Abuja, urging the judiciary not to allow itself to be used as an instrument to suppress opposition parties in Nigeria.
The protest comes amid the ongoing leadership dispute within the ADC involving the David Mark-led faction and another faction headed by Chief Nafiu Bala.
The protesters alleged that the suit instituted by Bala, which was recently remitted to the Federal High Court by the Supreme Court for hearing, is a calculated attempt to distract and destabilise the opposition party.
It would be recalled that in April, the Supreme Court set aside a decision of the Court of Appeal in Abuja which had directed parties in the leadership tussle to maintain the status quo ante bellum. The appellate court’s order had formed the basis upon which the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) withdrew recognition of the David Mark-led leadership of the party.
In a unanimous judgment delivered by a five-member panel, the apex court subsequently directed that the matter be returned to the Federal High Court for an accelerated hearing of the suit filed by aggrieved party chieftain, Nafiu Bala.
However, when the matter came up before Justice Peter Lifu Oko of the Federal High Court today, proceedings were marked by heated exchanges among counsel representing the various parties.
During the proceedings, the lawyer representing the Plaintiff and the Defendants’ Counsel traded accusations, with counsel representing the Plaintiff alleging that the Respondents were deliberately frustrating efforts to move the case forward and holding the court proceedings to ransom.
Tension further escalated when a Senior Advocate of Nigeria representing one of the Respondents engaged in a verbal exchange with the Judge. Justice Lifu subsequently cautioned the learned Silk against what the court described as unruly conduct during proceedings.
Counsel representing parties seeking to be joined in the suit also informed the court that petitions had been filed against the National Judicial Council (NJC), the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, and Justice Lifu himself. Based on this development, he argued that the judge ought to recuse himself from further hearing the matter.
The Court, however, asked that all the parties who had filed a motion seeking recusal move same, after listening to submissions from the parties, Justice Lifu reserved ruling on the various applications seeking his recusal from the case.
The matter was subsequently adjourned until June 16, 2026, for ruling on the applications.