561
By Oscar Okhifo
The Alliance for Democratic Rights (ADR) has urged the Supreme Court to strictly uphold constitutional provisions and established legal precedents in the ongoing leadership dispute within the African Democratic Congress (ADC), warning that the credibility of the judiciary is at stake.
ADR Leader, Olayinka Yusuf, made the remarks on Monday in Abuja.
According to him, the Supreme Court faces a “defining moment” in deciding whether to reaffirm constitutional limits on judicial intervention in political party affairs or succumb to what he described as mounting political pressure.
“This is not just about ADC; it is about whether Nigeria still respects the rule of law in political party management,” Yusuf said.
He cited Section 83 of the Electoral Act, arguing that it limits judicial interference in internal party affairs and reinforces the autonomy of political parties in resolving leadership disputes.
However, legal experts note that while the Electoral Act provides internal autonomy, Nigerian courts have in several landmark decisions maintained jurisdiction where allegations involve breaches of the constitution, party constitutions, or fair hearing principles.
Yusuf insisted that the Supreme Court had consistently ruled that leadership disputes within political parties are generally non-justiciable and should be resolved internally.
“The apex court has spoken clearly over the years that courts should not be dragged into internal party leadership tussles,” he said.
He further alleged that the ADC crisis has been influenced by political interests, referencing claims circulating in political circles that key political actors are backing rival factions.
According to him, there are reports alleging that former House of Representatives Speaker, Femi Gbajabiamila, was linked to efforts to influence internal dynamics of the party, including claims that he directed Leke Abejide to destabilise one faction while supporting Nafiu Bala in the leadership contest.
However, there has been no official confirmation of these allegations, and all individuals mentioned have yet to publicly respond to the claims.
Reacting to similar allegations in earlier political disputes, a senior constitutional lawyer who requested anonymity described such claims as “serious but unproven assertions that must not be allowed to prejudice judicial proceedings.”
“The Supreme Court does not decide cases based on political narratives. It decides strictly on law and evidence,” the lawyer added.
Yusuf warned that any departure from established judicial precedent could undermine public confidence in the judiciary and damage its independence.
“If the Supreme Court reverses itself on settled principles, it will not only weaken the judiciary but also send a dangerous signal ahead of the 2027 elections,” he cautioned.
Meanwhile, a member of one of the ADC factions, who declined to be named, dismissed ADR’s position, insisting that the matter before the court involves “clear violations of the party constitution that cannot be swept under internal resolution alone.”
“We are not asking the court to manage our party. We are asking it to interpret breaches of law and enforce justice,” the party source said.
The Supreme Court had earlier reserved judgment in the ADC leadership dispute involving factions linked to former Senate President David Mark, former Osun State Governor Rauf Aregbesola, and Nafiu Bala.
A date for judgment has not yet been announced.