There is jubilation in David Mark camp as the Federal High Court in Abuja has adjourned indefinitely the suit challenging the leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) under former Senate President David Mark, following the plaintiff’s request that the matter be transferred to another judge.
Justice Emeka Nwite adjourned the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025 after counsel to the plaintiff, Luka Musa Haruna, informed the court that a letter had been written to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court seeking reassignment of the case.
According to Haruna, the letter requesting the transfer was dated May 4, 2026.
Before the adjournment, the plaintiff’s lawyer also informed the court that the Supreme Court had on April 30 dismissed an interlocutory appeal filed by David Mark against the proceedings.
He added that the apex court also vacated an earlier order of the Court of Appeal which had stayed proceedings in the substantive suit.
The application for transfer was strongly opposed by lawyers representing the defendants.
Counsel to the second defendant, Sulaiman Usman, described the move as “forum shopping and judge shopping.”
Also reacting, counsel to the fifth defendant, P.I. Oyewole, accused the plaintiff of attempting to invite the Chief Judge to “indulge in judicial rascality.”
In his ruling, Justice Nwite held that the court could not act on the transfer request without hearing all parties involved, noting that doing otherwise could breach the defendants’ fundamental rights.
The judge subsequently adjourned the matter sine die to allow parties file the Certified True Copy (CTC) of the Supreme Court judgment and ensure service of the transfer request letter on the defendants.
The court also said it would await any directive from the Chief Judge regarding the request for reassignment.
The suit was filed by ADC chieftain, Nafiu Bala Gombe, who is seeking an order restraining David Mark, former Osun State Governor Rauf Aregbesola, and others from presenting themselves as leaders of the party.
The plaintiff argued that their emergence allegedly violated the ADC constitution and provisions of the Electoral Act.
