A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on Tuesday awarded a fine of N1m against the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and its embattled National Secretary, Rauf Aregbesola, over an application seeking the judge’s withdrawal from the suit.
The court, while describing the Aregbesola and ADC’s applications as “forum shopping”, warned that judges should be careful to “accede to such baseless allegations so that they don’t allow litigants choose judges that suit them.”
Daily Trust reports that the ADC and Aregbesola had, in separate motions, asked Justice Peter Lifu to recuse himself from the suit filed by an aggrieved party member, Bala Nafiu, citing alleged bias.
It would be recalled that Nafiu had, in the suit, sought an order restraining David Mark, Aregbesola, and members of their interim National Working Committee (NWC) from parading themselves as the party’s leaders.
Islamic New Year: Tinubu Felicitates Muslims, calls for Patriotism NIGERIA DAILY: What Becomes Of Atiku And The Opposition If ADC Is Deregistered?
He had argued that the emergence of Mark, Aregbesola and other NWC members as party’s leaders breached the provisions of the party’s constitution and the Electoral Act.
Nafiu had sued ADC, Mark, Aregbesola, Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and Ralph Nwosu as 1st to 5th defendants respectively in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025.
Nwosu was the former ADC National Chairman who stepped down for David Mark leadership of the party.
Ruling on the recusal application on Tuesday, Justice Lifu held that the motions lacked merit and devoid of credible evidence aimed at frustrating the order of the Supreme Court for accelerated hearing of the case.
The judge also held that the reasons advanced in the affidavits by the applicants were “extraneous”, adding that the court painstakingly considered all three processes by parties and by affidavit evidence, there is no iota of bias found.
“There is no element of bias being painted by the applicants as alleged. Where then is the element of bias in the motions for recusal? This is an abuse of court process. The motions were fundamentally defective,” the judge said.
Justice Lifu said the applicants made the allegations so that the case could be assigned to another judge that would do their biddings.
He added, “The law is settled that allegations of bias are grave allegations which are not made lightly. Whoever alleges bias must provide clear evidence.
“It becomes apparent that the applicants have failed completely to prove the allegations. It is a cheap attempt to blackmail and intimidate the court. As I said, nobody can intimidate the court.
“Parties cannot choose which court they should be heard. Matters are assigned to judges by the administrative head of the court and no applicant can choose who to hear and determine their matters.
“A judge must be firm in doing justice and not dance to the whims and caprices of counsel. No court worth its salt should allow this.”
Justice Lifu, who said the entire application was based on speculation, said if allowed, lawyers could use this as a tool against the court when they know a case would not favour them
According to him, if this application is granted in the absence of credible evidence, it will set a dangerous precedent.
“On the whole, I found no merit in the application and it is hereby dismissed with N500, 000 cost each against the applicants and in favour of the plaintiff,” the judge ruled.
Earlier when the case was called, a lawyer, Kalu-Kalu Agu, who appeared for Nkemakolam Ukandu, the National Welfare Secretary of ADC, challenged the judge from delivering the ruling, having ordered the deregistration of ADC in his judgement on Monday.
It would be recalled that Agu, on behalf of Ukandu, had filed a motion seeking to be joined in Bala Nafiu’s suit.
The lawyer reminded the judge of his previous day’s judgment directing the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister ADC having failed to meet the constitutional threshold.
“My lord, the clerk of this court did mention the matter is slated for ruling today. In view of your lordship ruling and continuous existence of the 1st defendant (ADC) in this matter, and having been declared dead, I don’t see any reason why this ruling should continue.
“In your judgment, this court ordered INEC to deregister the 1st defendant. So in the eye of the law, the 1st defendant is not existing. Are you a party in third suit?” Justice Lifu asked.
“Yes, I am my lord,” Agu responded. “Who joined you, or you joined yourself in your chambers?” the judge asked.
In his reaction, Nafiu’s lawyer, Robert Emukpoeruo, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, disagreed with Agu’s submission that he was a party in the suit.
Emukpoeruo said he was yet to read the judgement mentioned by Agu, hence, it had no relevance in the instance proceedings.
He said by Order 9 Rule 14(4)) of the court, until Ukandu is joined by the judge, he is yet to be a party.
When Agu attempted to respond to Emukpoeruo’s submission, the judge threatened to invoke the powers of the court on him.
Realwan Okpanachi, who appeared for Aregbesola; Suleiman Usman, SAN, lawyer to Sen. David Mark and Peter Oyewole, who represented Chief Ralph Nwosu, also made their respective submissions.
In his ruling, Justice Lifu said the instant case was distinct from the Monday’s matter where a judgement was delivered against ADC.
After the ruling on recusal application, the case was adjourned until June 23 for hearing of all pending applications.
UPDATE NEWS:
Nigerians can now invest ₦2.5 million on premium domains and profit about ₦17-₦25 million . All earnings paid in US Dollars . Rather than wonder, click here to find out how it works .
Join Daily Trust WhatsApp Community For Quick Access To News and Happenings Around You.
This news development was originally reported by our media partner DailyTrust News .
