The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has questioned the move by lawyers to Nafiu Bala Gombe seeking the reassignment and transfer of his suit against the David Mark-led National Working Committee.
This is as the Federal High Court in Abuja on Friday adjourned indefinitely the suit filed by Gombe, challenging the party’s leadership under former Senate President David Mark.
Justice Emeka Nwite adjourned the matter sine die (indefinitely) after the plaintiff informed the court that he had applied to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court for the transfer of the case to another judge.
But reacting in a statement yesterday, National Publicity Secretary of the ADC, Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, said it was curious, if not outrightly laughable, that a plaintiff who claims to want justice is now running away from the speedy hearing of his own case.
The ADC said the letter written by Nafiu Bala, seeking to reassign the matter to another judge, was part of an attempt to manipulate the judiciary and confirms the party’s fears that agents of the ruling party are making efforts to get the case assigned to one of their preferred judges.
ADC alleged that some agents of the Federal Government were making frantic efforts to manipulate the judiciary by switching the judge in the leadership matter involving Nafiu Bala.
Abdullahi said, ‘Having received the letter written by Bala requesting the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court to reassign the case to another judge, it has now been proven beyond all reasonable doubt that the sinister plot allegedly led by a notorious federal minister is indeed afoot. This is no longer about justice or the merit of the case, but about the desperation of political operatives confronted by the utter frivolity of their case.
‘With this development, it is now obvious that Nafiu Bala Gombe and his handlers are trying to turn the judiciary into a shopping mall where you pick and choose judges suitable for your political schemes.
‘You cannot file a case and then begin to dictate which judge should hear it simply because proceedings are not going your way. No litigant has the right to choose a judge in his own matter.
‘The attempt to seek an indefinite adjournment after the clear direction of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court for a speedy trial, in fact, raises serious questions about the willingness of the lower courts to obey express orders from superior courts.’
ADC said instead of allowing the matter to proceed expeditiously, as any aggrieved plaintiff genuinely seeking justice would, ‘Bala and his handlers are looking for ways to stall the case until they are able to find a judge willing to do their bidding and pervert the course of justice.
‘We regret to say that this is exactly the kind of political interference and behind-the-scenes manipulation that has brought the judiciary into disrepute,’ the statement said.
Court adjourns ADC leadership suit indefinitely
Meanwhile, the Federal High Court in Abuja yesterday adjourned indefinitely the suit filed by an African Democratic Congress chieftain, Nafiu Bala Gombe, challenging the party’s leadership under former Senate President David Mark.
Justice Emeka Nwite adjourned the matter sine die after the plaintiff informed the court that he had applied to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court for the transfer of the case to another judge.
The suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025 has generated a fresh leadership crisis within the ADC following the emergence of Mark and former Osun State governor, Rauf Aregbesola, in the party’s leadership structure.
At the resumed proceedings, counsel for the plaintiff, Luka Musa Haruna, told the court that the Supreme Court had on April 30 dismissed the interlocutory appeal earlier filed by Mark against the proceedings.
He said the apex court also set aside the Court of Appeal’s order staying proceedings in the substantive suit.
The lawyer, however, disclosed that the plaintiff had written a letter dated May 4, 2026 to the Chief Judge seeking reassignment of the case to another judge.
Haruna urged Justice Nwite to await the administrative decision of the Chief Judge on the request.
The request was opposed by lawyers representing the defendants, who accused the plaintiff of attempting to frustrate the accelerated hearing earlier ordered by the Court of Appeal and upheld by the Supreme Court.
Counsel for the first defendant, Realwan Okpanachi, faulted the plaintiff for allegedly ambushing the defence with the transfer request.
‘We have not received any communication regarding that application. My Lord, so as it is, we don’t know the form or the content of that application. Therefore, we take the approach of the plaintiff as an ambush,’ he said.
‘We also consider it as an attempt to frustrate the order of accelerated hearing granted by the Court of Appeal and upheld by the Supreme Court,’ he added.
Counsel for the second defendant, Sulaiman Usman, described the move as ‘forum shopping and judge shopping.’
‘So my Lord, for the plaintiffs to come back to this court, and to inform us today that they have written a private correspondence to the Honourable Chief Judge, and to make a request for this court to await the outcome of that private correspondence, is not only unfortunate My Lord, but a dangerous trend which must not be allowed to stand,’ he said.
Counsel for the fifth defendant, P.I. Oyewole, also opposed the request, describing it as ‘strange’ and accusing the plaintiff of inviting the Chief Judge ‘to indulge in judicial rascality.’
Responding, Haruna maintained that the plaintiff stood by the application.
Ruling, Justice Nwite held that the court could not take any action on the letter without hearing all parties.
‘Taking a decision or any action in such a letter without hearing from the defendants will amount to breach of their fundamental right in this suit,’ the judge ruled.
He added that since the letter was addressed to the Chief Judge, the trial court could not make any pronouncement on it.
Justice Nwite subsequently adjourned the matter indefinitely.