The African Democratic Congress, has approached the Federal High Court in Abuja, seeking orders to compel the Independent National Electoral Commission to reverse its decision deleting the party’s top officials from its records.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, follows the removal of the names of Mark, listed as National Chairman, and Rauf Aregbesola, National Secretary, from INEC’s official portal on April 1.
In a motion on notice dated April 7, Mark, through his counsel, Sulaiman Usman, SAN, prayed the court to issue a mandatory injunction directing the electoral body to immediately restore the names of the party’s National Working Committee members as they existed before the dispute.
The application, brought pursuant to Order 26 Rules 1 to 4 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2019, as well as under the court’s inherent and equitable jurisdiction, seeks three principal reliefs.
Part of the reliefs reads, “An order of mandatory injunction, setting aside the decision, act, or directive of the respondent removing the names of the applicant’s National Working Committee from its official portal and the decision of refusal to attend or monitor the applicant’s congresses or convention pending the hearing and determination of the suit.”
The applicant also sought “an order of mandatory injunction, directing INEC to forthwith restore and maintain records of the names of Senator David Mark as National Chairman and Rauf Aregbesola as National Secretary, as well as all members of the National Executive Committee.”
In addition, the motion is seeking “an order restraining INEC from tampering with, or otherwise interfering with, the said leadership records of the 1st defendant, recognising or giving effect to any contrary or competing claims, pending the final determination of this suit.”
The application is a direct response to the March 12 judgment of the Court of Appeal in a dispute initiated by a former deputy national chairman of the party, Nafiu Gombe, before Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court.
In a seven-point argument supporting the motion, Usman contended that the appellate court had expressly ordered all parties to maintain the status quo ante bellum, a legal principle referring to the last uncontested state of affairs before litigation commenced.
He argued, “As of Sept. 2, 2025, when this action was instituted, the 2nd defendant (Senator David Mark) was the recognised national chairman of the 1st defendant.
“The said leadership structure had already been constituted. The plaintiff had already resigned his prior office and had no subsisting role within the party.”
The senior advocate further submitted that INEC acted under a misinterpretation of the appellate court’s directive by removing the names of the party’s leadership, thereby creating what he described as a vacuum within the party’s structure.
According to him, the electoral umpire’s decision amounts to a position of non-recognition that is inconsistent with the true intent of the Court of Appeal’s order and capable of undermining the substance of the pending suit.
Usman added, “The law is settled that a mandatory injunction may be granted at an interlocutory stage to restore a party to the position wrongfully altered.
“This is a proper case for the exercise of the equitable jurisdiction of this honourable court.”
Olamilekan Adigun is a graduate of Mass Communication with years of experience in journalism embedded in uncovering human interest stories. He also prioritises accuracy and factual reportage of issues.
