Follow Us on Google
Political judicial misadventure can be used to describe a situation where the legal system or a court’s decision has gone badly wrong due to political influence or entanglement. This is echoing the definition of judicial rascality which describes a culture of lawlessness within the law, where the legal process is manipulated to serve ulterior or political motives rather than to uphold justice. It means the deliberate abuse of judicial power, where judges or courts act recklessly, capriciously, or unethically to circumvent the law.
The judgement of Justice Peter Lifu in the case of Nafiu Bala Gombe v. ADC and Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) on 5 November 2026 will remain a sore point in our judicial history forever. The reason is that there was no legality considered in the judgement. The only consideration for the judgement was political. Montesquieu was very clear that there is no liberty for citizens if judicial power is not separated from executive power because where the judicial power is joined with the executive power, the judge might behave with violence and oppression. This is the cardinal reason successive Chief Justices of Nigeria vehemently admonish judges to stay clear from politics and politicians.
The case has an awkward history. African Democratic Congress (ADC) was founded by Ralphs Nwosu and registered in 2005 as one of the political parties in Nigeria. Since its formation, the party has never gained national prominence. Politicians usually use the party as special purpose vehicle to win elections and abandon it after elections. The determination of its founder to make the party a national party never wavered one bit. He was willing to make sacrifices to achieve that. He forged alliances with other political parties in the past during elections.
When the opportunity manifested itself for the party to be chosen by all the opposition political parties and leaders led by HE Atiku Abubakar, Ralphs Nwosu and the entire leadership of ADC grabbed it with two hands. Negotiations went on for 18 months and at the end of the day, on 2 July 2025, ADC unveiled David Mark and Rauf Aregbesola as the National Chairman and National Secretary for the ADC.
In other to fulfil the applicable laws, ADC gave 21 days notice to INEC for the convocation of its National Executive Committee meeting held on 29 July 2026. This meeting was to give legal effect to the dissolution of the existing NEC of ADC and install the new NEC led by David Mark. INEC duly monitored the NEC meeting and certified it compatible with all the extant constitutional and statutory electoral laws. This was the reason INEC started and continued dealing with ADC and the new leadership of David Mark till date.
One of the members of the National Working Committee who participated in all these processes with joy was Nafiu Bala Gombe. He claimed to be the Deputy National Chairman (North East) of ADC under Ralphs Nwosu. He was in the meeting when ADC was unveiled. He officially resigned his position as the Deputy Chairman of the Party in his own writing. Bala participated and didn’t object to the NEC’s decision to dissolve the existing NEC of the ADC, and install the new one led by David Mark.
For the avoidance of doubt, it was reported that Bala lobbied to become a member of the new NEC of ADC under David Mark without success. Why would he lobby for membership of the new ADC leadership if he didn’t resign his former post and if he didn’t believe that the old leadership was dissolved?
Other News
When the new coalition of ADC attracted all the opposition parties and leaders into it, the All Progressives Congress (APC) became jittery. They did not hide it. Femi Gbajabiamila, the Chief of Staff to the President publicly told Hon Abejide and Bala Gombe not to leave ADC but to remain in ADC to scatter and destroy it. He categorically stated that they would support them to achieve that.
Incidentally, these two persons went to court to demand the scattering and destruction of the ADC. The hand of Esau, but the voice of Jacob. Hon Leke Abejide filed a suit challenging ADC’s leadership structure at the Federal High Court in Abuja (Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1637/2025) before Hon. Justice Musa S. Liman. The Learned Judge threw out his case as lacking in merit and affurmed without equivocation that David Mark-Led leadership is the authentic leadership of ADC.
In the judgment, Justice Musa Liman held that the court lacked jurisdiction to interfere in the internal affairs of the ADC, describing the suit as non-justiciable. He also ruled that Abejide lacked the locus standi to institute the suit, having failed to show that his rights were violated by the emergence of the Mark-led leadership. The court further held that Abejide did not explore the party’s internal dispute resolution mechanism. On the substantive issues, the court ruled in favour of ADC and David Mark, holding that the transfer of leadership from Ralph Nwosu to Mark did not breach the ADC Constitution or the Electoral Act. The court ordered Abejide to pay N2 million in litigation costs to each defendant. It also awarded N10 million in costs against Abejide’s lawyer.
The judgement of Justice Liman echoed section 83(5)(6)(b) of the Electoral Act. In Nigeria, the internal affairs of a political party refer to the private, domestic, and administrative matters that belong solely to the autonomous operation of the party, as established by Nigerian jurisprudence and statutory law. They include party membership, party leadership and offices, internal administration and day-to-day running of party, drafting and applying internal guidelines. Note the specific judgement of Liman, “the transfer of leadership from Ralph Nwosu to Mark did not breach the ADC Constitution or the Electoral Act.”
In Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, Nafiu Bala Gombe challenged the interim leadership of the ADC led by David Mark and Rauf Aregbesola. On September 4, 2025, trial judge, Justice Emeka Nwite directed respondents to show cause on a motion ex parte. After intervening appeals and an inexplicable transfer request by Nafiu Gombe, the case was reassigned to Justice Peter Lifu, by Justice Tsoho, the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court.
In a judgment delivered on 5 November 2026, Justice Lifu ruled in favour of Nafiu Bala Gombe. The court held that the emergence of Senator David Mark as national chairman and the accompanying executive violated the party’s constitution and guidelines, nullified all actions taken under Mark’s leadership, and recognised Nafiu Bala Gombe as the authentic leader of the ADC.
This judgement is in direct conflict with the judgement of Justice Liman, and in comparison with the extant laws, and Supreme Court decisions, the judgement of Justice Peter Lifu was delivered not in accordance with the extant laws. ADC constitution is very clear that the NEC can dissolve the leadership of the party and install a new one if the need arises. The subject matter was about the party leadership and offices of ADC, which falls within the internal affairs of the party and is beyond the jurisdiction of the courts. Nafiu Bala Gombe has resigned from the leadership of ADC and has no injury to suffer with the continuance of the leadership of David Mark, and this robs him of the locus standi to institute the matter before the court.
The facts of both Abejide and Bala Gombe’s cases are on all fours. The judgements ought to be exactly the same because the courts are all applying same laws. The only difference is that one case was handled by Justice Liman who has not, to the best of my knowledge, been reprimanded by a higher court as being unfit to serve on the bench. On the other hand, Justice Lifu has been roundly condemned by the Court of Appeal for his judicial rascality and judicial impertinence who is unfit to sit on the bench. Ironically, this condemnation descended on Lifu when he illegally and unconstitutionally deregistered the ADC against the express order of the COA to stay his proceedings against ADC. Lifu granted jurisdiction to the National Forum of Former Legislators to demand the deregistration of ADC and went ahead to obey a party which had no injury to suffer with the continuance of David Mark leadership of ADC.
Justice Lifu, therefore, had not hidden his mission, which is to illegally and unconstitutionally deregister and dissolve ADC in order to advantage the APC. Even in his latest judgement, he went further to cancel the nomination of all the ADC candidates without giving them fair hearing. It is against natural justice for a court to make an order affecting a person who is not made a party to a suit. Any party who is denied the right to contest election risks being deregistered after the election because one of the requirements of the law to remain registered as a party is to win a seat in a general or state election or obtain 25% of votes cast in a federal, state, or local government election. For ADC that does not have a state governor, allowing this ignoble judgement of Lifu to stand, means the dissolution of ADC, which is exactly what Lifu sought for, but failed to achieve with the case of the former legislators against ADC.
Lifu’s judgement appears to be a reflection of systemic failure in the judiciary. Supreme Court ruled for expedited hearing. Justice Tsoho, the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, decided to transfer the matter from one court to another, from a seemingly impartial judge to a partial one, thereby frustrating the matter from being heard expeditedly and impartially. The NJC must thoroughly investigate this matter and apportion appropriate sanctions on erring judicial officers, if it is serious in preserving our democracy. Punishment is the deterrence for bad conduct.
