Senior lawyers on Tuesday tackled Justice Peter Lifu of the Abuja Federal High Court over his continued hearing of a suit against the David Mark leadership of the African Democratic Congress, ADC, even after granting an order which proscribed the party on Monday.
The lawyers told the judge that having proscribed the party on Monday in his judgment, the ADC in the eyes of the law was “dead” and cannot be resurrected by the same judge.
At the resumed hearing of a suit instituted by factional ADC national chairman, Nafiu Bala Gombe, Dr Suleiman Usman, SAN, who stood for David Mark, Realwan Okpanachi who represented Rauf Aregbesola, and Kalu Agu, counsel for Nkemakolam Ukandu, vehemently demanded to know the status of the party before proceeding in any suit against it.
Their demand was predicated on the judgment the same judge delivered on Monday, which expressly ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, to immediately de- register five political parties including ADC.
They claimed that having deregistered ADC on Monday, in the eyes of the law, the party is dead for now and there is nothing for the judge to adjudicate upon.
In the tension soaked arguments, the lawyers insisted that a simple clarification on the status of the party would determine whether they would pack their law books and leave or stay back to speak for their respective clients.
However, Justice Lifu requested to know if the lawyers have obtained the certified true copy of his judgment and digested same, which was answered in the negative.
The judge directed the lawyers to read the judgment first adding that the case of de-registration was quite different from the one challenging David Mark’s leadership.
Meanwhile, Justice Lifu on Tuesday refused to recuse himself from the ADC leadership dispute suit.
Delivering ruling in an application by David Mark and Raul Aregbesola to recuse himself from further presiding over the suit, Justice Lifu dismissed the application for being baseless and unmeritorious.
The judge held that the allegations of likelihood of bias, impartiality and prejudice raised against him by the two defendants were not supported with any cogent and verifiable evidence.
He said that the recusal application was part of the struggles to frustrate speedy hearing of the case as directed by the Supreme Court, adding that he would not succumb to blackmail, intimidation and harassment from any party appearing before him.
“No responsible court of records will dance to the whims and caprices of a litigant. No court must fall to cheap blackmail and intimidation.
“As for me, I can never be intimidated or harassed. A judge must be bold, courageous and firm. This is what I stand for. Court exists to do justice and not to do the bidding of any party,” he said.
Justice Lifu while dismissing the recusal application imposed a fine of N500,000, each, on David Mark and Aregbesola, to be paid to the plaintiff in the case, Nafiu Bala Gombe.
Meanwhile, the Judge has fixed June 23, 2026 for further hearing in the matter.
Eze Chidiebere Paul
I'm dedicated to creating high-quality content that informs, inspires, and delights. If you have any questions or suggestions, don't hesitate to get in touch. Happy reading!
