Adamawa ADC leadership crisis: Court fixes next Thursday for ruling/judgment
The lingering leadership crisis in Adamawa State chapter of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) has entered a critical phase today as the State High Court IX, presided over by Justice Benjamin Manji, heard consolidated arguments in the suit filed by the embattled Shehu Yohanna and one other challenging their removal from office.
The crisis, has already balkanized the party into three splinter groups.
Related news
Adamawa ADC crisis: Atiku lauds Yohanna over resignation from Fintiri’s govt
Adamawa ADC crisis: Jada raises alarm, accuses Dasin of moves to impose unpopular candidates
ADC: Komsiri’s ctee makes early lead, inaugurates LGA, ward excos in Adamawa
The plaintiffs, led by the embattled State Chairman, Shehu Yohanna Kambile, and his secretary, contend that their four-year tenure was illegally terminated before expiration.
The defendants in the suit include top party figures: Ambassador Umar Sulaiman, Sadiq Dasin, Saidu Komsiri, former Secretary to the Government of the Federation Babachir David Lawal, the NWC, and the national chairman, Senator David Mark.
The plaintiffs are praying the court to reverse what they describe as an “unconstitutional intervention” and to restrain the defendants from parading themselves as leaders of the party in the state.
During Thursday’s sitting, the court took applications from both sides, including the defendants’ notice of preliminary objection challenging the jurisdiction of the court, and the substantive suit seeking reinstatement of the dissolved executives.
Justice Manji subsequently adjourned the matter to Thursday next week for ruling and judgment, following an agreement by all counsel.
Violation of constitution justifies court intervention — Yakubu Philemon (SAN)
Speaking after the court session, counsel to the plaintiffs, Yakubu Philemon (SAN), said the court had taken both the defendants’ preliminary objection and the substantive matter together to fast-track the process.
“The defendants argued that this is an internal party affair which the court should not interfere with. But we argued that where there is a violation of the constitution of the party, the court can indeed intervene,” he said.
He explained that the plaintiffs’ main demand is for the court to affirm that they remain the legitimate state executives of the ADC and to restrain the defendants from assuming leadership roles in Adamawa State.
“We asked the court to grant all our reliefs and stop the defendants from parading themselves as leaders of the party in the state. After hearing both sides, the court adjourned to Thursday next week for judgment,” Philemon added.
He expressed confidence that the court would uphold the plaintiffs’ arguments, which he said are rooted in constitutional violation and unlawful removal.
This issue is purely internal; Court lacks jurisdiction” — Dr. Ibrahim Effiong
On the other side, counsel to the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th defendants, Dr. Ibrahim Effiong, reaffirmed their stance that the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain what he described as a purely internal party matter.
“We argued both the notice of preliminary objection and the main suit. The matter has been adjourned for ruling and judgment. We believe the court has no jurisdiction because this is strictly an internal party dispute,” he stated.
Effiong also clarified the defence’s position on the contentious leadership claims within the ADC.
“Their case is strange. They claim their committee was dissolved but at the same time we have multiple people claiming to be chairman. How many chairmen do we have? The NWC acted within its constitutional powers to appoint an interim leadership pending proper elections,” he explained.
He insisted that the ADC constitution, particularly Article 19, empowers the NWC to dissolve any executive committee, whether duly elected or no and set up an interim structure when necessary.
“Whether you call it ‘transition committee’ or anything else, it is still an interim committee. The NWC has the constitutional remit to create interim leadership. The plaintiffs have not pointed out a single article breached by the NWC,” Effiong said.
He concluded that the defence expects a fair pronouncement from the court, noting.
“We’ve done our best. It is now for the court to rule first on the preliminary objection and then on the substantive matter,” he said.
