Site icon TheNewsGuru

Court refuses to stop Mark, Aregbesola from assuming ADC Leadership

Court refuses to stop Mark, Aregbesola from assuming ADC Leadership
Advertisement

The Federal High Court in Abuja has declined to grant an application seeking to stop David Mark-led leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) pending the hearing of the substantive suit.

Justice Emeka Nwite refused the three prayers sought in the ex-parte motion filed by Mr Nafiu-Bala Gombe, a former Deputy National Chairman of ADC, and moved by his lawyer, Michael Agber.

Rather, Justice Nwite directed Mr Gombe, the plaintiff in the suit, to put all the defendants on notice to show cause why the motion should not be granted.

The judge then adjourned the matter until Sept. 15 for the defendants to show cause.

Advertisement

The ruling was delivered on Sept. 4 and the certified true copy of the order made available to News Agency of Nigeria on Thursday.

NAN reports that while the former Senate President, David Mark, is the current national chairman of ADC, the ex-Osun Governor, Rauf Aregbesola, is the national secretary of the party.

The court decision is contrary to what is being reported in some section of the media.

Gombe, in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, had sued ADC, Sen. Mark, Aregbesola, Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and Chief Ralph Nwosu as 1st to 5th defendants respectively.

Advertisement

In the ex-parte motion dated and filed on Sept. 2, the plaintiff sought three reliefs.

Gombe sought an order of interim injunction restraining the 4th defendant (INEC) from recognising the 2nd (Mark) and 3rd (Aregbesola) defendants as the national chairman and national secretary of the ist defendant (ADC) pending the hearing of the motion on notice.

He also sought an order of interim injunction restraining the 2nd and 3rd defendants their cohorts from parading themselves as National Chairman and National Secretary of the 1st defendant,  pending hearing in the motion on notice already filed and served in this matter.

He sought an order restraining the 4th defendant/ respondent from recognising and or dealing with the 2nd and 3rd  defendants.

Exit mobile version