As S’Court Verdict Keeps ADC’s 2027 Hope Alive…

For teeming supporters of the African Democratic Congress, Thursday April 30, 2026 would remain a date to be cherished for a very long time when the Supreme Court came not just to their rescue but confirmed that the judiciary is indeed the last hope of the common man, writes Alex Enumah.

The courtroom of the Supreme Court was filled to the brim on Thursday April 30, with litigants, lawyers, observers as well as supporters of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), despite very strict security measures to curtail the number of persons gaining access into the courtroom. Immediately outside the courtroom, hundreds of ADC supporters who also besieged the headquarters of the apex court to witness what could be described as a make or mar verdict of the apex court stood patiently for hours, praying for a favourable decision.

Tension heightened for nearly two hours, especially when the apex court in a split judgment of three-to-two dismissed the appeal of the Tanimu Turaki-led faction of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), that had hoped to overturn the unfavourable judgment of the Court of Appeal and the Federal High Court judgments against the convention that produced their leadership.

However, relief and hope came the way of millions of supporters of the ADC immediately the apex court disagreed partly with the decision of the appellate court, and went further to clear the coast by setting aside the order that threatened the presence of the ADC in the 2027 general elections.

The apex court in the course of the delivery of its unanimous judgment declared, “…the order of status quo ante bellum” issued on March 12, 2026, by the Court of Appeal, Abuja, “was unnecessary, unwarranted and improper”.

Justice Mohammed Garba, who delivered the lead judgment held that the lower court was wrong to have raised the issue of a preservatory order “sou moto” (on its own, not requested by any party in the matter), and subsequently issued the status quo ante bellum order. While explaining that preservatory orders are usually issued by a court to avoid foisting a fait accompli on the court, or to protect the subject matter before a court, the apex court held that the trial court was still in control of the proceedings and as such the appellate court was out of place to issue any preservatory orders.

According to the judgment, the appellate court haven dismissed the issue of jurisdiction brought by the appellant and also ordered accelerated hearing of the suit at the trial court, ought to have ended the matter there.

“The directive made (status quo ante bellum) after striking out the appeal and issuing an accelerated hearing was unnecessary, unwarranted and improper”, Garba held, adding that, “it is hereby set aside”.

Meanwhile, the apex court stated that the appellate court was in order when it dismissed the appeal for being incompetent and ordered parties to return to the trial court for accelerated hearing. According to the apex court, the appellant at the lower court improperly raised the issue of jurisdiction which has not been determined at the trial court. “The court below was right to hold that the appeal was incompetent…it also robs this court the jurisdiction to hear it”, Justice Garba held.

Haven resolved the first two issues against the appellant, the apex court subsequently made an order directing the return of the case back to the Federal High Court, for continuation of hearing. They predicated their decision on the grounds that the trial court neither granted nor refused the order of interlocutory injunction restraining INEC from recognizing the Mark leadership nor restrained them from parading themselves as leaders of the ADC, but held that the respondents should appear before the court to show cause why they should not be restrained.

The verdict no doubt brought great joy and fresh hope to the ADC and its million supporters across the country, especially when the Independent National Electoral Commission, within minutes of the court judgment restored the names of the David Mark-led leadership on its official website and portal, as leaders of the ADC.

With the verdict of the apex court directing all parties back to the trial court, the Mark-led leadership can now conveniently submit their membership register to INEC, and organize primaries for the selection of their flag bearers in the 2027 general elections, while at the same time defend their leadership before the courts.

Recall that an aggrieved member of the ADC, Mr Nafiu Bala Gombe, had last year dragged the Mark-led leadership to court, accusing them of hijacking the party structure. Pending the hearing of his suit, the plaintiff filed a motion exparte, praying the court to restrain INEC from according recognition to the Mark-led ADC and another order restraining Mark and his executive members from parading themselves as leaders of the ADC.

However, the trial judge, Justice Emeka Nwite after hearing the applicant, who is a former Deputy National Chairman of ADC, and his lawyer, Michael Agber, on September 4, 2025, refused the three prayers sought in the ex-parte application. The judge rather directed the applicant to put all the defendants on notice to show cause why the motion should not be granted and adjourned the matter until September 15, 2025, for the defendants to show cause.

The defendants in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, are the ADC; Interim National Chairman of the ADC, David Mark; Interim National Secretary, Rauf Aregbesola; INEC and former ADC national chairman, Chief Ralph Nwosu.

In the unanimous judgment delivered by Justice Mohammed Garba, the Supreme Court held that the appellate court was right when it dismissed the appeal of David Mark for lacking in merit and also ordered accelerated hearing at the trial court.

Garba however faulted the appellate court for going ahead to issue a preservative order, after striking out the appeal for being incompetent.

Besides, the Supreme Court berated the appellate court for raising the issue of preserving the res (subject matter of the case) on its own (somoto) and then issuing an order directing parties to maintain status quo ante bellum.

Reacting, David Mark had approached the appellate court to challenge the jurisdiction of Nwite to entertain the suit by Gombe in the first place. While insisting that the trial court cannot entertain the suit by Gombe, for being an internal matter of the ADC, Mark also argued that the trial court became functus officio when he refused the grant of the restraining order against the Mark-led leadership.

But, the appellate court in its judgment last month dismissed Mark’s appeal and returned the case to the trial court for accelerated hearing. The appellate court in addition ordered all parties in the suit to maintain status quo ante bellum, pending the hearing and determination of the suit at the trial court.

Relying on the status quo ante bellum order, INEC subsequently de-recognized the Mark leadership as well as removed their names from its official website and portal.

Miffed by the de-recognition of its leadership, the ADC, had ran to the apex court to challenge the appellate court’s ruling and also filed a motion for the stay of the execution of the status quo ante bellum order. Besides, they urged for accelerated hearing in the matter.

But, the Supreme Court in its wisdom however ordered parties to file in all their processes and ordered accelerated hearing in the appeal. At the hearing on April 22, Mark’s lawyer, Jibrin Okutepa (SAN) had urged the apex court to allow the appeal, recalling that the apex court had in a March 21, 2025 judgment put an end to the issue before the court, when it held that, “no court has jurisdiction to entertain cases bordering on internal affairs of political parties”.

Okutepa therefore urged the apex court to allow the appeal and hold that the trial court lacked the jurisdiction to entertain a suit bordering on the ADC’s internal matters.

Robert Emukpero (SAN) who represented the 1st respondent, Hon Nafiu Gombe however, urged the apex court to reject the appeal and affirm the judgment of the lower court, which held that the case of the appellant was premature and dismissed it.

After taking arguments from all parties, Justice Garba, who presided over the proceedings, subsequently announced that judgment is reserved to a date that would be communicated to parties.

Worried that the party may be shut out of the 2027 polls, due to the leadership vacuum created by INEC’s de-recognition of its leaders, the ADC once again wrote the leadership of the Supreme Court to seek for accelerated judgment.

The ADC had in the letter to the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), claimed that failure of the apex court to deliver judgment within the next few days, would jeopardize the chances of the party in the 2027 general elections, as well as dash the hope of millions of Nigerians intending to vote for the ADC and its candidates at the general elections slated for early January, 2027.

In the letter dated April 28, the party’s lead counsel, Mr Shuaibu Aruwa (SAN) recalled that the apex court “graciously heard expeditiously on April 22, 2026 and judgment was thereafter reserved to a date to be communicated by the court”.

Aruwa stated however, that they are “most respectfully constrained to request for the CJN’s kind intervention and directive in ensuring that the judgment is rendered timeously”, on grounds that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), who is the 4th Respondent in the said Appeal purportedly, acting pursuant to the judgment of the lower court in Appeal No: CA/ABJ/145/2026, has removed or de-recognized the leadership of the ADC.

The senior lawyer submitted that the action of INEC has left the ADC without leadership at the moment even though the ADC remains a recognized registered political party in Nigeria.

In addition, the ADC drew the attention of the CJN to INEC’s Timetable for the 2027 general elections and the activities in readiness which it claimed have already commenced.

“Your Lordships would find attached copies of the INEC Press Release de-recognizing the leadership of ADC and the Revised INEC Timetable for the 2027 General Elections.

“My Lord, the ADC’s ability to comply with these statutory requirements to participate in the 2027 General Elections is wholly dependent on the timely delivery of the judgment in the instant Appeal. Without the delivery of judgment within the next three days from the date of this letter, the ADC stands the grave and irreversible risk of being excluded from participating in the 2027 General Elections. This would disenfranchise millions of Nigerians who have subscribed to the ideals of the ADC and deny them their constitutional right to freely associate and contest elections through a political party of their choice.

“My Lord, we are mindful of the enormous responsibilities and workload of this Honourable Court. We are equally aware that justice delayed, in this peculiar circumstance, would amount to justice denied. The entire political future of our client and the legitimate expectations of its members nationwide now hangs in the balance”, the letter read in part.

Within 24 hours of receipt of the letter of appeal for accelerated judgment, the apex court announced that judgment would be delivered the next day.

The speedy hearing and determination of the appeals surrounding the leadership of the two major political parties has once again showed that the judiciary is not just the hope of the ordinary citizen but the bastion of democracy and is capable of providing stability in the polity if and when the need arises.