.. awards N10m cost against them
By Vivian Okejeme
The Abuja Division of the Appeal court, Monday, in a dissenting decision set aside appeal filed by Senator David Mark and Rauf Aregbesola against the judgment of the Federal High Court in Abuja which stopped them from dissolving the States Working Committees (SWC) of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).
In a split decision of two-to-one judgement, the three-man panel of the appallate court affirmed the order of the trial court restraining the Independent National Electoral Commission(INEC) from recognising or participating in any state Congresses appointed by the Mark-led caretaker leadership.
In the lead judgement read by Justice Okon Abang, the appallate court held that the conference and conventions were conducted in violation of the order of the lower court, adding that it was lawful for the lower court to grant all the reliefs sought by the Plaintiffs.
Justice Abang maintained that the decision of the lower court is not perverse, adding that it is the responsibility of an elected state executive committee and not the national leadership to conduct congresses of a political parties.
Therefore, he declared that the appeal lacked merit and hereby disallowed and awarded the cost of N10million to the appallants.
In his own judgement, Justice Donatus Okorowo, agreed with the decisions of Justice Abang that the appeal lacked merit, adding that the decision of the trial court is allowed.
However, the chairman of the panel, Justice Abba Bello Mohammed, disagreed with the decisions of his learned brothers.
Justice Mohammed, in his minority decision, maintained that the trial court error in law to assumed jurisdictions and entertained a matter bordered on internal affair of a political party.
He declared the judgement of the trial court as a nullity for granting all the reliefs sought by the Plaintiffs to distort the internal affairs of the party.
“I disagree with the judgement that the ground five(Jurisdiction) is incompetent. Issues of jurisdiction cannot be erased.
“Any matter entertained by a court without jurisdiction is a nullity. it deserves to be set aside.
“The decision of the trial court is hereby set aside by me for wants of jurisdiction and the judgement of the trial court is allowed, justice Mohammed held.
In the appeal, the ADC, Mark and Aregbesola are challenging the decision of Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the FHC which stopped them from cutting short the four years tenure of the state officers of the party.
The Plaintiffs are state Chairmen of the APC represents by Don Norman Obinna, Johnny Tovie Derek, Obah C. Ehigiator, Hon. Olona Yinka, Dr. Charles Idowu Omideji, Samuel Pam Gyang, and Obianyo Patrick.
They had in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/58/2026, sued for themselves and on behalf of all State Chairmen and State Executive Committees of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).
Listed as defendants in the matter are the African Democratic Congress (ADC); Senator David Mark; Senator Patricia Akwashiki; Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi; Rauf Aregbesola; Prof. Oserheimen Osunbor, who is also sued on behalf of the Caretaker/Interim National Working Committee; and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
In an originating summons filed at the Federal High Court, the ADC state chairmen had sought judicial interpretation of constitutional provisions guiding the tenure and powers of party organs, particularly in relation to the party’s leadership and planned state congresses.
They wanted the court to determine whether the four-year tenure of the ADC’s State Working Committee and State Executive Committee remains valid and subsisting, pending the conduct of a properly constituted State Congress and the convocation of a National Convention.
They premised their argument on Section 223 of the 1999 Constitution as well as Article 17 of the party’s constitution and a Final Mediation Report dated December 23, 2023.
The plaintiffs had contested the legality of actions taken by a body described as the “Caretaker/Interim National Working Committee,” which they claimed was not constitutionally recognized within the framework of the party.
Specifically, they want the high court to determine whether such a body has the authority to appoint Congress Committee Members for the purpose of conducting state congresses.
In addition, the state chairmen challenged the validity of any appointments made by the caretaker body, describing them as unconstitutional, null, and void.
The plaintiffs further contended that the planned state congress slated for April 2026, if conducted under the supervision of the said caretaker committee, would constitute a gross violation of the party’s constitution.
In her judgment, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik voided and set aside, the plan of the David Mark leadership to dissolve the State Working Committee.
Not satisfied with the high court verdict, the Plaintiffs approached the Court of Appeal praying it to set aside the judgment of the lower court on allegations of miscarriage of justice.
