.
By Badamasi Suleiman Gandu NP, ESQ
The African Democratic Congress (ADC) is presently confronted with two separate suits before courts of competent jurisdiction, namely:
- Incorporated Trustees of the National Forum of Former Legislators (NFFL) v. INEC, AGF, ADC & Ors (Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/2025);
- Nafiu Bala Gombe v. ADC & 4 Ors (Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025).
- NFFL v. INEC & Ors
The crux of this action is predicated on Section 225A of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), which empowers INEC to deregister a political party on grounds including failure to secure at least 25% of votes cast in one State of the Federation in a Presidential Election.
While it is alleged that the ADC failed to meet this constitutional threshold in the 2023 general elections, this argument is fundamentally flawed and legally unsustainable.
The amendment introducing Section 225A came into force in March 2023, after the conduct of the Presidential Election in February 2023. It is a settled principle of Nigerian law that statutes do not operate retrospectively unless expressly stated. There is no provision within the amendment indicating any retrospective application.
Consequently, any attempt to apply the said provision to the 2023 general elections is unconstitutional, null, and void.
- Nafiu Bala Gombe v. ADC & 4 Ors
This suit revolves around the leadership of the ADC, specifically the claim by Mr. Nafiu Bala Gombe that he automatically assumed the position of National Chairman following the exit of Mr. Ralph Okey Nwosu, by virtue of being the National Vice Chairman.
This claim is vehemently contested by the ADC, which maintains that David Mark was duly appointed as National Chairman on 29th July, 2025 in accordance with the party’s internal processes.
From the foregoing, it is evident that the dispute is purely an intra-party matter bordering on leadership succession. The law is firmly settled that courts lack jurisdiction to interfere in the internal affairs of political parties, particularly in matters relating to leadership and party appointment.
If judicial precedent is faithfully applied, the court is bound to decline jurisdiction and dismiss the suit for being an intra-party dispute.
Forgery Allegation – A Tactical Misstep
A further dimension arises from the resignation letter allegedly written and signed by Mr. Gombe, which he now claims is forged.
This introduces a criminal element of forgery, which must be established through proper investigation by law enforcement authorities. Should such investigation fail to establish a prima facie case of forgery, any official report affirming the authenticity of the letter will significantly undermine Mr. Gombe’s claims and strengthen the position of the ADC.
Conversely, if forgery is established, appropriate criminal proceedings may follow. However, in either scenario, the burden of proof lies squarely on Mr. Gombe, and favors the ADC.
In summary:
- The NFFL suit is legally defective, as it seeks to apply a constitutional provision retrospectively, contrary to established legal principles.
- The Gombe suit is an intra-party dispute over leadership, which is non-justiciable and outside the jurisdiction of the courts.
- The allegation of forgery, as presently framed, does not advance Mr. Gombe’s case and may ultimately operate against him.
Accordingly, both actions are weak, untenable, and highly susceptible to dismissal.
Thanks for reading
