Headlines
Supreme Court to Rule on ADC, PDP Leadership Crises Today
- /home/rhoncare/pointblank.ng/wp-content/plugins/mvp-social-buttons/mvp-social-buttons.php on line 27
https://pointblank.ng/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Supreme-Court.jpg&description=Supreme Court to Rule on ADC, PDP Leadership Crises Today', 'pinterestShare', 'width=750,height=350'); return false;" title="Pin This Post">
- Share
- Tweet /home/rhoncare/pointblank.ng/wp-content/plugins/mvp-social-buttons/mvp-social-buttons.php on line 69
https://pointblank.ng/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Supreme-Court.jpg&description=Supreme Court to Rule on ADC, PDP Leadership Crises Today', 'pinterestShare', 'width=750,height=350'); return false;" title="Pin This Post">
Attention has shifted to the Supreme Court, which has fixed April 30 (today) for judgment in the leadership tussle within the African Democratic Congress (ADC).
A five-member panel led by Justice Mohammed Garba will resolve the appeal filed by the David Mark-led faction concerning the authentic leadership of the party.
Also on Thursday, the court is expected to determine the leadership dispute rocking the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).
Two PDP factions—one led by Kabir Turaki and the other by the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike—are laying claim to the leadership of the party.
The Supreme Court had on April 22 reserved judgment in the ADC crisis to a date to be communicated to the parties involved in the tussle.
However, on Tuesday, the ADC formally wrote to the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, pleading for the quick delivery of judgment in the leadership tussle at the national level.
The party claimed it would suffer irreparable harm if judgment in the protracted battle was not delivered within the period allowed by the Electoral Act for fielding candidates for the 2027 general elections.
It stated in part: “Without the delivery of judgment within the next three days from the date of this letter, the ADC stands the grave and irreversible risk of being excluded from participating in the 2027 general elections.
“This would disenfranchise millions of Nigerians who have subscribed to the ideals of the ADC and deny them their constitutional right to freely associate and contest elections through a political party of their choice.”
At the April 22 hearing, Jibrin Okutepa, SAN, who represented David Mark, urged the Supreme Court to allow the appeal, arguing that the apex court had earlier, on March 21, 2025, held that “no court has jurisdiction to entertain matters bordering on the internal affairs of political parties.”
During the hearing, Okutepa urged the apex court to hold that the Federal High Court in Abuja lacked jurisdiction to entertain the suit.
However, Robert Emukperu, SAN, who represented the first respondent, Nafiu Gombe, urged the court to dismiss the appeal and affirm the judgment of the lower court, which held that the suit was premature.
It will be recalled that a three-member panel of the Court of Appeal dismissed Mark’s appeal, ruling that it was premature and filed without leave of the trial court.
In the PDP matter, the first appeal, marked SC/CV/164/2026, stems from a decision of Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja, who restrained the party from proceeding with its planned convention pending the determination of a suit filed by former Jigawa State Governor Sule Lamido.
On November 14, the court issued a final order restraining the PDP from conducting its national convention.
Justice Lifu held that Lamido was “unjustly denied” the opportunity to obtain a nomination form to contest for national chairman, in violation of the PDP constitution and internal regulations.
The Court of Appeal later upheld the decision on March 9, prompting the PDP to appeal.
The second appeal, SC/CV/166/2026, was filed by the PDP, its National Working Committee (NWC), and National Executive Committee (NEC).
It arose from a judgment delivered by Justice James Omotosho, which stopped the party from holding its Ibadan national convention.
The Court of Appeal upheld that decision, agreeing that INEC should not validate the outcome of the convention.
After hearing all arguments, the Supreme Court reserved judgment, stating that the date would be communicated to the parties.
Headlines
Atiku Drags Tinubu to Court over Certificate Forgery, Eligibility to Contest 2027 Election
Atiku, who is the presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), personally appeared at the court registry to depose to an affidavit in support of the suit.
The suit was instituted by Atiku and the ADC against President Tinubu, the All Progressives Congress (APC), and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
It is anchored on Sections 137(1)(j), 139(1)(a)(i), and 285(14)(c) of the 1999 Constitution, as well as provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026.
At the heart of the case is Section 137(1)(j), which disqualifies anyone who presents a forged certificate to INEC from contesting for President.
The plaintiffs are asking the court to determine whether Tinubu and the APC should be disqualified from the 2027 election over allegations that the President submitted an NYSC discharge certificate bearing the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle” to INEC for both the 2023 and 2027 elections.
According to Atiku’s affidavit, the name on the certificate is different from “Bola Ahmed Tinubu,” and the document was not obtained by the President.
Speaking after taking the oath, Atiku said his personal appearance was to show seriousness.
“I came here personally because the issues before the court go to the heart of our Constitution and the integrity of the office of President… I have therefore put my name, my signature and my oath behind the facts we are presenting to the court. Now it is President Tinubu’s turn to answer them,” he said.
The suit also asks INEC to produce Tinubu’s Form CF001 submitted for the 2023 and 2027 elections.
Atiku said he had applied for certified true copies of the form but got no response before filing.
“This is precisely why we have gone to court. We are not asking Nigerians to decide this matter on social media… We are asking the institution holding the records to produce them and the judiciary to examine the evidence and pronounce on it,” Atiku stated.
“If the certificate belongs to Bola Ahmed Tinubu, let that be established before the court. If ‘Tinubu Bola Adekunle’ and ‘Bola Ahmed Tinubu’ are one and the same person for the purpose of that certificate, let the evidence establish it.”
Beyond the certificate, the ADC and Atiku are also challenging aspects of the Electoral Act, 2026, which they argue restrict pre-election challenges to a candidate’s qualification. They contend that no law can override the Constitution.
“Can an Act of the National Assembly be used as a shield against an express provision of the Constitution?… Our position is that the Constitution remains supreme,” Atiku said.
Among the reliefs sought is an order disqualifying Tinubu and the APC from participating in the 2027 presidential election if the court upholds the plaintiffs’ case.
“Nobody should misunderstand what is at stake. Nigerian graduates cannot complete NYSC documentation with one identity and simply ask employers to ignore discrepancies… The Presidency is not an immunity certificate against constitutional scrutiny,” he added.
Atiku further urged INEC to demonstrate neutrality by making the relevant records available to the court.
“The 2027 election must begin with clarity about the qualification of those seeking the Presidency. Nigerians should not be asked to vote first and investigate later,” he said.
Lead counsel, Joseph Onu Silas, Esq., said the legal team was confident the case would help deepen Nigeria’s electoral jurisprudence.
“This is not about privilege, personalities or presidential power. It is about one Constitution and one standard for every Nigerian. Nobody is above the Constitution — not Atiku Abubakar, not Bola Tinubu, and certainly not the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,” Onu said.
Lawyer petitions EU over Tinubu’s qualification, cites ‘subversion of constitution’
Relatedly, a renowned Nigerian lawyer, Kalu Kalu Esq., has submitted a petition to the European Union in Brussels, alleging that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu subverted constitutional order ahead of the 2027 general election.
His remark was shared on Facebook Friday by Paul Ibe, Media Adviser to former Vice President Atiku Abubakar.
Kalu, who spoke at the European Commission headquarters, said the petition seeks the EU’s intervention to “help restore constitutional democracy in Nigeria.”
He accused President Tinubu of submitting false academic credentials to the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, and failing to state the primary and secondary schools he attended.
“Mr President, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, has suspended the constitutional order in Nigeria because of his false academic credentials, which he submitted to INEC for the 2027 general election and he did not state the primary school and the secondary school he attended,” Kalu said.
The lawyer cited Section 137(1)(j) of the 1999 Constitution, arguing that presenting a false certificate to INEC disqualifies a candidate.
“Section 1371J says if you have presented a false certificate to INEC, the Independent National Electoral Commission, you will not be qualified to run election and he has submitted forged documents, forged certificates to INEC that made him not to be qualified to run for the 2027 general election,” he stated.
Kalu further alleged that because “they have captured all the power in Nigeria,” the President has “imposed himself on Nigeria, thereby subverting the provisions of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended, which is a mini-coup, a sub-coup against the people of Nigeria.”
He said the purpose of his visit to Brussels was to formally submit the petition to the EU and solicit support for the restoration of constitutional governance in Nigeria.
“Good afternoon all and good afternoon to the whole world. I am here at the European Commission to submit a petition to the European Union concerning the subversion of constitutional order in Nigeria… So, I’m here to submit the petition to the EU to help restore constitutional democracy in Nigeria,” he said.
As of the time of filing this report, the Presidency and INEC have not responded to the allegations.
The European Union-Supported Election Observation Group has deployed 843 observers across Osun State for Saturday’s governorship election, as part of efforts to independently assess the conduct of the poll.
The group, comprising the Centre for Media, Society, the International Press Centre, the Nigerian Women’s Trust Fund, the Kukah Centre and Yiaga Africa, disclosed this in its preliminary statement on the election on Friday in Osogbo, the state capital.
Speaking at the event, the Executive Director of Yiaga Africa, Samson Itodo, said the observers would monitor, document and report on the electoral process in line with the principles of independence, impartiality and non-partisanship.
Itodo said; “the election was of significant national importance as it would provide another opportunity to assess the implementation of provisions of the electoral legal framework and offer INEC, security agencies, electoral stakeholders and the public further insight into preparations ahead of the 2027 general election.”
He said, “the group acknowledged INEC’s declared operational, technological and logistical readiness for the election, including the deployment of election materials and personnel.”
The EU group also noted that INEC had increased the number of Bimodal Voter Accreditation System devices following technical challenges identified during the mock accreditation exercise, with additional devices provided as backup.
On result management, however, the group called for greater clarity on the electronic transmission and backend validation of polling unit results.
It urged INEC to make the result transmission process more transparent and verifiable, including providing clearer information on the backend validation process and the use of electronic result sheets.
The group also called on the Commission to ensure smooth electronic transmission of validated polling unit results and maintain adequate live backup of election data to prevent disruptions during accreditation and counting.
United States President, Donald Trump, says his country is now in “total control” of the Strait of Hormuz amid ongoing tensions with Iran over the reopening of the strategic waterway.
Trump made the claim while speaking to reporters at Joint Base Andrews, saying the situation with Iran was progressing well despite continued disagreements between both countries.
“Iran is going fine – going just absolutely fine. We totally control the Strait of Hormuz. We have control over it; nobody else, only us. Our navy is unbelievable, and things going great for our country,” Trump told reporters at Joint Base Andrews.
“I don’t trust Iran. I’m the last person to trust Iran; they’ve lied to me constantly. We have total control over the Hormuz Strait right now; they don’t have control,” he added.
The claim comes as the United States and Iran continue to exchange demands over the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, casting further uncertainty over negotiations aimed at ending their five-month conflict.
Although the US has confirmed its involvement in the talks, Iran maintains that it is negotiating directly only with Oman. Tehran has also proposed that the future management of the strategic waterway be shared with Oman.
The Strait of Hormuz is a critical global energy route, with about one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas supplies passing through it before the US-Israel war with Iran began at the end of February.
On Monday, Trump said he would seek compensation from Iran for deaths and injuries associated with conflicts and attacks spanning several decades.
His position followed Iran’s demands for reparations over the war last week, as Tehran said it would not reopen the strait until Washington addresses its political and economic conditions.
