Alleged Bias: ADC Chieftain Seeks Order Compelling NJC to Probe FHC CJ, Judge 

Alex Enumah in Abuja 

A chieftain of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Nkemakolam Ukandu has approached a Federal High Court in Abuja, for an order compelling the National Judicial Council (NJC), to probe allegations of corruption and bias against the Chief Judge (CJ) of the Federal High Court (FHC), Justice John Tsoho and a judge of the Abuja division of the FHC.

The plaintiff claimed that the CJ and Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, who are 2nd and 3rd defendants in the suit displayed acts of bias in a case where he is the 6th defendant.

The case marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025, has Hon. Dumebi Kachikwu and four others as plaintiffs while the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and five others are the defendants.

The plaintiff in the suit dated and filed March 3, is also seeking an order of injunction restraining Justice Abdulmalik from continuing to preside over the above-mentioned suit, pending the hearing and determination of the plaintiff’s petition to the NJC.

In addition, Ukandu is also seeking another order directing Abdulmalik to recuse herself from the above suit, “on grounds of manifest bias/grave likelihood of bias against the plaintiff.

The suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/445/26 was filed on behalf of the plaintiff by an Abuja based legal practitioner, Kalu Kalu Agu.

In a 52-paragraph statement of claim, the plaintiff stated that following an application, he was joined as the 6th defendant in the suit marked: FHC/ ABJ/ CS /1331/2025, on October 3, 2025.

While Dumebi Kachikwu, Adikwu Elias, Etimbuk Umoh, Muhammad Khala, and Alakum William are the 1st to 5th plaintiffs respectively in the suit marked: FHC/ ABJ/ CS /1331/2025, INEC, ADC, Chief Ralph Nwosu, Senator David Mark, and Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola are 1st to 5th defendants respectively.

Ukandu, stated that problem however started when the judge came down heavily on his counsel at the proceedings of October 23, 2025, for not filing response to the originating summons served on him barely 24 hours by plaintiffs’ counsel and then abridged time of response from 30 days to seven, including Saturday and Sunday.

“The claimant being dissatisfied with the Ruling, petitioned the 2nd defendant against the said ruling and demanded for a transfer of his case to another Judge on grounds of manifest bias/grave likelihood of bias on the part of the Court against the claimant. 

“The claimant thereafter filed a Notice of Appeal, compiled and transmitted Record of Appeal and the appeal entered at the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division. 

He lamented further that the CJ in a letter dated November 7, 2025, and addressed to the claimant’s counsel directed the court to proceed with the hearing of the matter despite a pending appeal at the Court of Appeal, a development which led the claimant to file an action against the 2nd defendant in suit No: FCT/HC/CV/4684/2025: Nkemakolam Ukandu VS. Justice James Tsoho and two others, “wherein the 2nd defendant was directed to maintain status quo in Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025: Dumebi Kachikwu and four others & VS. INEC and five others”.

Ukandu contended that despite the pendency of the matter and the order of the FCT High Court which directed the 2nd defendant to maintain staus quo in Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025: the 2nd defendant, in disobedience to the said order went ahead and reassigned Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025: to the 3rd defendant.

Plaintiff further claimed that despite taking judicial notice of the pending appeal, suit at the FCT High Court and the “order endorsed ex-facie the said writ of summons the 3rd defendant started presiding and heard the matter on January 30, without serving notice of hearing on his lawyer, Mr. Kalu Agu.

According to the statement of claim, the bailiff of the court filed a purported certificate of service of the hearing notice of January 30, purportedly served on the plaintiff’s counsel in the 3rd defendant’s file, adding that the 3rd defendant subsequently acted on the said certificate of service to hear the matter on January 30, 2026.

Amongst the reliefs he is seeking include a declaration that it is the responsibility of the NJC “to investigate complaints against judicial officers and mete out sanctions accordingly”.

While he is also praying for an order directing the NJC to investigate the allegation of corruption and manifest bias against the 2nd and 3rd defendants with regards to their involvement in Suit number: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025, he is also asking for another order restraining the 3rd defendant from continuing to preside over the said case.

“An order of injunction restraining the 3rd defendant from continuing to preside over Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025 … pending the hearing and determination of the petition to the 1st defendant by the plaintiff against the 2nd and 3rd defendants.

“An order of court directing the 1st defendant to recuse herself in suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025 … on grounds of manifest bias/grave likelihood of bias on the part of the 1st and 2nd defendants against the Claimant.

No date has been fixed for hearing in the suit.