1 hour ago
2
The Federal High Court in Abuja on Friday, again adjourned indefinitely a suit filed by a factional leader of the African Democratic Congress, ADC, Nafiu Bala Gombe, following a request by the plaintiff seeking the transfer of the case to another judge.
Justice Emeka Nwite adjourned the matter sine die after parties clashed over a letter written by the plaintiff to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court seeking the reassignment of the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025.
The suit, which has generated intense legal fireworks within the ADC, was earlier stalled following an interlocutory appeal filed by the second defendant, David Mark, which eventually travelled to the Supreme Court.
At Friday’s proceedings, counsel for the plaintiff, Luka Musa Haruna, informed the court that the apex court had on April 30, 2026, delivered judgment in the interlocutory appeal.
Haruna said the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal for lacking in merit and also set aside the Court of Appeal’s order staying proceedings in the substantive suit.
“The interlocutory appeal of the 2nd defendant has travelled to the Supreme Court. My Lord, we are glad to inform this honourable court that on the 30th day of April 2026, the Supreme Court delivered its judgment on the interlocutory appeal dismissing the said appeal for lacking in merit,” he said.
The lawyer, however, disclosed that the plaintiff had, through a letter dated May 4, 2026, applied to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court for the transfer of the case to another judge.
He said the letter had already been transmitted to the court registrar and urged Justice Nwite to await the administrative decision of the Chief Judge.
“At this juncture, we must humbly pray to your Lordship, to wait for the administrative decision of the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court,” Haruna said.
The request immediately drew strong opposition from the defence team, which 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, who held brief for S.E. Aruwa, argued that the plaintiff had misrepresented the outcome of the Supreme Court judgment.
According to him, the apex court partially allowed the appeal and specifically upheld the appellate court’s order directing accelerated hearing of the case.
Okpanachi further faulted the plaintiff for allegedly ambushing the defendants 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.
He added, “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.”
The senior lawyer maintained that litigants were not permitted to choose courts or judges to determine their cases.
He, however, urged the court to maintain the earlier order adjourning the matter sine die pending the filing of the Certified True Copy of the Supreme Court judgment.
Counsel for the second defendant, Sulaiman Usman, also condemned the plaintiff’s move, describing it as “forum shopping and judge shopping.”
Usman told the court that the Supreme Court had commended Justice Nwite “in glowing terms” over his handling of the proceedings.
“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 hinge that 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 third defendant, M.E. Sherriff, aligned himself with the submissions of the first and second defendants, arguing that substantive prayers could not be sought through ordinary letters.
Similarly, counsel for the fifth defendant, P.I. Oyewole, described the application as “strange” and accused the plaintiff of inviting the Chief Judge “to indulge in judicial rascality”.
“My Lord, asking the Chief Judge to transfer that kind of case is worse than forum shopping,” Oyewole argued.
Responding, Haruna faulted the defence for attacking a letter they had not seen, insisting that the plaintiff stood by its application.
Justice Nwite subsequently held that the court could not take any decision 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.
“This matter is best adjourned sine die to afford the parties properly file a Certified True Copy of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the interlocutory appeal in the suit, to serve the defendants with the letter addressed to the Honourable Chief Judge, and finally to await further or any directive from the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court,” Justice Nwite said.
The matter was thereafter adjourned indefinitely.
ADC leadership suit adjourned indefinitely over Nafiu Bala’s move to reassign case
