ADC Alleges Bias Over Reassignment of Party Leadership Case, Demands Full Judgment

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) Presidential Campaign Council has accused Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice John Tsoho, of bias over the reassignment of a case involving the party’s leadership dispute from Justice Emeka Nwite to Justice Peter Lifu.
The council also called for the immediate release of the full judgment in the matter, saying the party needed the official copy and the reasons for the decision to pursue appropriate legal action.
In a statement signed by its Director of Strategic Communications, Phrank Shaibu, on Tuesday, the council alleged that Justice Tsoho reassigned the case to Justice Lifu a day after receiving a formal protest from the ADC National Secretary, Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola.
The statement was titled, “Tinubu Must Face Atiku, Not Hide Behind Tsoho’s Courtroom Manoeuvres.”
The council said Justice Nwite had already commenced hearing the case and had not recused himself when the plaintiff requested that it be transferred.
According to the statement, the plaintiff sought the reassignment on the grounds of delay and a loss of confidence in obtaining a timely hearing.
It added that the party’s lawyers responded to the request on May 11, 2026, outlining previous adjournments, disputing the plaintiff’s account of who caused them and describing the request as forum shopping.
The statement further disclosed that Aregbesola wrote to Justice Tsoho on June 2, asking him to reverse the reassignment.
It said the letter expressly stated that the party had no confidence in Justice Lifu’s impartiality and formally protested the transfer.
“Yet, the case was assigned to Justice Lifu the next day,” the council stated.
Questioning the decision, the ADC said, “Justice Tsoho received our protest. Why did he proceed with the transfer? What did he find in the plaintiff’s allegation of delay that outweighed the court record and our protest? Let him publish his reasons. Let Nigerians read them beside the letters.”
The council said the sequence and timing of the reassignment raised concerns about bias and the impartiality of the process, urging Justice Tsoho to publicly explain why the party’s protest was disregarded.
It also expressed concern over Justice Lifu’s previous handling of another suit involving the ADC, in which he reportedly ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister the party and four others despite a Court of Appeal order staying proceedings.
According to the statement, the appellate court subsequently described his decision to proceed as the “highest form of judicial impertinence” and invoked Supreme Court authority on “judicial rascality” before nullifying the deregistration judgment.
The council also referred to a certified judgment delivered by Justice Musa Liman, who dismissed a challenge to the ADC leadership for lack of merit and locus standi.
It said Justice Liman held that the internal party dispute was non-justiciable, declared the leadership handover lawful and affirmed INEC’s recognition of the party’s National Chairman and National Secretary.
The ADC argued that Justice Lifu, sitting in the same Federal High Court, could not disregard those orders, adding that the issue was among the questions its lawyers had taken before the Court of Appeal.
The statement said Justice Tsoho owed Nigerians an explanation if no external pressure influenced his decision to transfer the case.
The council maintained that whatever circumstances surrounded the Chief Judge, the ADC’s right to a fair hearing must not be compromised.
It further urged judicial officers to reflect on the role of court decisions in the crises preceding the end of the First and Second Republics, citing the judicial history of both periods.
The ADC also called on the National Judicial Council (NJC) to investigate the reassignment, the formal protest received by Justice Tsoho and Justice Lifu’s conduct.
Turning to the political implications of the dispute, the council challenged the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) to confront former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar politically rather than through court proceedings.
“The ruling APC should be bold enough to face Atiku Abubakar on the political battleground and answer for the hardship Nigerians endure. The hallowed chambers of our courts must not be turned into arenas for political combat,” it stated.
The council insisted that Atiku remained the party’s presidential candidate and said it would continue to defend its position before the Court of Appeal.
“Atiku remains our candidate. The law is on his side, not sentiment. We will defend that position before the Court of Appeal and keep the record before Nigerians,” the statement added.
It said Nigerians’ right to choose their president must not become a bargaining chip in the struggle for political power.