Embassy-Oseni MOMODU
In plethora of decided cases, courts have held party politics is strictly internal affairs for political parties to adjudicate. See the case of Anyanwu V. Emmanuel (2025), where the apex court ruled that “party leadership disputes are a no-go area for courts”. In similar vein, in Uba V. Ozigbo (2021), the Supreme Court also in lucid terms declared that “candidate nominations are within the exclusive domain of political parties”.
Interestingly, the new Electoral Act 2026 now fortified these judicial authorities statutory flavor under section 83(5). But political parties must purge itself from assering that this legal position ipso facto crowns them with borderless powers with arbitrary conducts of its affairs. Its actions nevertheless could still warrants the unavoidable interference of external agent- the Court, when Constitutional breaches are occasioned.
A recent relevant reference is the African Democratic Congress Party, ADC. Embroid in multiple leadership crises it inherited, the court became the last option where some aggrieved members sought redress. I have chosen to maintain delibrate silence against commenting or writing on the subject. This is due to my political alignment. It’s baffling the nation’s political players haven’t learnt from election petitions history whether pre or post electoral matters. It is the position of the law that courts don’t meddle in the internal affairs of political parties. Even when there is obvious injurious acts or infraction, the court won’t still interfere until an aggrieved party approaches it for redress.
This was the debacle of ADC on April 1st 2026 when the Electoral umpire received court ruling to the effect that “all parties should maitain statusquo ante bellum”. The law suit was filed by some aggrieved members of the ADC against Senator David Mark’s interim National Executive Leadership. The order for “statusquo ante” was given legal effect by INEC chairman, Prof. Amupetan, SAN, occasioning delisting of their (ADC) leadership names from INEC porter. On this ground, Nigerians, whether roasted plantain-seller or road side mechanic abruptly became emergency-legal analysts and constitutional interpreters of court pronouncements. The law is clear on that. Two factional leadership of ADC claimed supremacy. Which should INEC recognize in such instance? David Mark’s or Nafiu Bala? INEC acted properly within the confines of law having regards to court’s ruling which it based its actions. Not everything in Nigeria should be trivialize.
In Zamfara ordeal 2019, the Supreme Court, while interpreting section 87 (9) of Electoral Act 2010, now section 88 (2) under the new Electoral Act 2026 (as altered) in the case: ALL PROGRESSIVES CONGRESS (APC) & 1 ANOR V. SENATOR KABIRU GARBA MARAFA & 179 ORS, suit Nos: SC.377/2019 & SC. 378/2019 respectively, the apex Court stated thus: “when it comes to selection and nomination of candidates for an election, political parties must not act arbitrarily but within the confines of their own Constitutions enacted by themselves and Electoral guidelines and other relevant laws relating to election matters. Accordingly, where political parties fail to comply with provisions of its Constitution and Electoral Guidelines, an aggrieved candidate(s) who contested in that primaries is fortified to ventilate his grievances before the Federal High Court or Election Petition Tribunal as the case may be”.
In Rivers State in that year 2019 General Elections, APC didn’t sponsor candidates for similar circumstances as in Zamfara State. Mr. Tonye Cole, the nominated APC gubernatorial candidate at the time had his primary election nullified by the court of Appeal for failure to comply with APC Constitution and Guidelines. The judge nullified nomination of Cole as Governorship candidate on ground that his nomination was marred by “illegality and unconstitutionality”. It was accordingly struck out.
Crises began in Rivers APC when court nullified Party’s Congreses and Primaries in 2018. An Appeal by Cole with 48 other candidates of the APC that emerged through the “Indirect Primaries” was dismissed on ground that they could not appeal a matter they lacked locus especially when they were already in “serial contempt of court”.
From the foregoing cases, INEC barred APC from sponsoring candidates in Zamfara and Rivers State because of its failure to adhere strictly to its party’s Constitution, Electoral Guidelines and Electoral Act 2019.
APC lost the two states that year. Nigerians should note that it doesn’t matter APC was the ruling party at Federal level then. Under Constitutional democracy, the law is the law even if heaven will fall. Obviously, there are laws already in place to hold it from falling down.
This is where the April 14th ADC Convention concerns my attention. Under the doctrine of ‘lis pendis’ involving leadership disputes, the ADC still went on and hastening National Convention conducted. Such action amounts to flagrant disobedience to lawful order of court.
The dictum of Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. cannot be more expedient in this regard. According to him, “the prophencies of what the courts will do in fact and nothing more pretentions are what l mean by the law”. In essence, the validity or otherwise of the April 14th ADC Convention would determine the legitimacy of the Party Primaries and participation of its candidates in the 2027 General Elections. Whether the Apex Court will decline jurisdiction on the matter or activate its spirit of judicial activism remains a discretionary exercise.
Ahead of 2027, I must therefore appeal to political leaders, party executives and power brokers across party divides in Nigeria not to taint their party Conventions and Primaries with legal pitfalls as such is capable of creating fertile ground for court’s intrusion into their internal affairs via litigation. Under the new Electoral Act, courts are banned to halt Primaries or General Elections during the pendency of any law suit by the authority of section 88(4) of Electoral Act 2026.
The 2026 Electoral Act (as altered) streamlined political parties primaries to majorly two modes: Direct and Consensus primaries within the spirit of sections 86 and 87. The Act also empowered Political Parties to abide by its own Constitution and Guidelines. Failure of which shall compel aggrieved individuals to seek redress in relevant courts. It therefore implies that a justly conducted primaries abiding strictly to laid down Electoral procedures would limit court interference in the internal affairs of Political Parties by more than 90%. Whether the ruling party, APC or opposition, the Electoral Act applies to every participating political party ahead 2027 elections.
If you have never appreciated and celebrated election victory, you will never know the impact of losing one. Let NWC of political party leadership and State Working Committee and Ward Executives take heed. “A stitch in time saves nine”.
~Embassy-Oseni MOMODU;
LFP, B.A, LL.B, BL, LLM (in view), writes from Abuja Nigeria. He can be reached via: osenixyz@gmail.com or +2348120567606.