APC Stooges Ask Court To Sack Mark-Led Interim ADC Leadership

Three operatives of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) who are suspected stooges of the All Progressives Congress (APC) have dragged the Senator David Mark-led interim leadership of the party to a Federal High Court.

The plaintiffs- Adeyemi Emmanuel, Ayodeji Victor Tolu and Haruna Ismaila- further challenged the membership of Senator Mark and others who were appointed as interim leaders of the party.

They prayed the court to, among other things, determine whether the purported handover of the party’s leadership structure to individuals involved in a merger was not a direct violation of a subsisting judgment.

A source told OSUN DEFENDER that the plaintiffs are stooges of the Tinubu administration, allegedly directed by the ruling party to destabilise the coalition structure.

The medium gathered that since the official launch and adoption of the coalition front last Wednesday, officials of the present administration have been launching verbal and online personal attacks on individuals in the ADC, using different platforms.

While the ADC was cited as the 1st defendant in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1328, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and the immediate past National Chairman of the party, Raph Nwosu, were joined as 2nd and 3rd defendants.

Likewise, Senator Mark, who was recently appointed as the Interim National Chairman of the party, ex-governor of Osun State, Rauf Aregbesola (the Interim National Secretary); and a former Minister of Sports, Bolaji Abdullahi (Interim National Publicity Secretary), were listed as 4th, 5th and 6th defendants, respectively.

Specifically, the plaintiffs posed legal questions for the court to determine, among which included, “Whether or not the appointment of the 4th, 5th, and 6th Defendants as Interim National Chairman, National Secretary, and National Publicity Secretary of the 1st Defendant was made in breach of the provisions of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) Constitution, 2018 (as amended).”

“Whether or not, given the combined provisions of Article 9, paragraph D of the ADC Constitution, 2018 (as amended), the 4th, 5th, and 6th Defendants are qualified to hold the respective offices to which they were appointed.

“Whether the key individuals involved in the merger, like the 4th, 5th, and 6th Defendants, were properly registered members of the 1st Defendant to qualify for a leadership position.

“Whether the constitution of the 1st Defendant, being an existing and not a newly formed political party, makes provisions for interim leadership positions such as Interim National Chairman, Interim National Secretary, and Interim National Publicity Secretary.

“Whether the current Executive Committee of the 1st Defendant ought not to have been dissolved or replaced only through a properly convened National Convention or a valid decision of the National Executive Committee (NEC).

“Whether the 2nd Defendant can lawfully recognise the 4th, 5th, and 6th Defendants as the Interim National Chairman, Interim National Secretary, and Interim National Publicity Secretary of the lst Defendant, by the relevant provisions of the Constitution of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), 2018 (as amended).

“Whether or not the 3rd Defendant’s purported handover of the party’s leadership structure to the newly constituted leadership of the ADC is not a direct violation of the judgment delivered in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/1541/2022 by Hon. Justice Binta Nyako on 21st December 2022.”

Upon the determination of the questions, the plaintiffs urged the court to hold that the appointment and nomination of interim leadership for the party “is unconstitutional, unlawful, null and void.”

As well as: “A Declaration that the appointment of the 4th, 5th, and 6th Defendants is inconsistent with and contrary to the combined provisions of the Constitution of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), 2018 (as amended).”

No date has been fixed for the matter to be heard.