When Is the Judiciary ‘Good’? ADC’s Changing Response to Court Rulings

The dispute over ADC’s leadership raises a question about how political parties respond to court decisions. ADC praised the judiciary after earlier rulings that favoured its position, calling them victories for the rule of law and democracy. After Justice Peter Lifu’s November 5 judgment went against the David Mark-led leadership, the party described the decision as politically motivated and alleged that the courts were being used to weaken the opposition. The judgment’s Certified True Copy clarifies that Atiku Abubakar is not personally named in the operative orders. However, the court declared actions taken by David Mark, Rauf Aregbesola and the National Working Committee they represented from July 29, 2025, null and void. The ruling could therefore affect the presidential nomination conducted under that leadership. The court also rejected Nafiu Bala Gombe’s purported resignation letter as reliable proof that he had resigned. It found that the process establishing the Mark-Aregbesola leadership did not meet the Electoral Act’s requirements for a democratic election. ADC has appealed and applied for a stay. A party can challenge a judgment through the courts. But disagreement with a ruling is different from questioning the judiciary only when the outcome is unfavourable. The standard should apply to every party: respect the process when you win, and challenge the judgment lawfully when you lose.

Use The App To Win ₦1m

Stories are shared by community members. This article does not represent the official view of NaijaWorld — the author is solely responsible for its content.