Supreme Court Ruling on ADC Sparks Debate as SAN Insists “Nothing Has Been Decided”

A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Oba Maduabuchi, has cautioned against celebrations following the recent Supreme Court judgment involving the African Democratic Congress (ADC), stating that the ruling does not conclusively settle the dispute within the party.

Maduabuchi made this known during an appearance on The Morning Show on Arise Television, where he argued that the apex court’s decision merely addressed a procedural issue rather than the substantive leadership crisis.

His comments come in response to the April 30 judgment of the Supreme Court of Nigeria, which set aside an earlier ruling by the Court of Appeal Nigeria that had barred the recognition of David Mark as National Chairman of the ADC.

In a unanimous decision delivered by Justice Mohammed Lawal Garba, the Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeal erred by issuing an order that was not sought by any of the parties involved in the case.

However, Maduabuchi maintained that the ADC should not have been before the Supreme Court in the first place, arguing that there was no valid appeal arising from the Federal High Court.

“The ADC had no business at the Supreme Court. There was no appealable decision by the Federal High Court,” he said.

He further criticized the Court of Appeal for exceeding its jurisdiction by issuing additional directives beyond the scope of the case.

“The Court of Appeal overstepped its bounds by making an order no one sought. While it correctly held that there was no valid appeal by the David Mark faction, it went further to order that the status quo be maintained,” he stated.

According to the senior lawyer, the appellate court’s directive was misinterpreted, stressing that it referred to maintaining the status quo ante bellum—the state of affairs before the dispute—rather than the current status.

He added that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) acted appropriately when it removed David Mark based on the Court of Appeal’s order.

The development underscores the lingering legal uncertainties surrounding the ADC’s leadership, despite the Supreme Court’s intervention.