The National Secretary of the David Mark-led African Democratic Congress (ADC), Chief Rauf Aregbesola, has appealed against the judgment of the Federal High Court in Abuja which nullified the emergence of the party’s leadership, asking the Court of Appeal to set aside the decision on the grounds that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to determine the dispute.
Aregbesola also filed a separate application seeking a stay of execution of the November 5, 2026, judgment delivered by Justice Peter Lifu, pending the hearing and determination of his appeal.
In a notice of appeal filed on Friday, November 6, 2026, through his lawyer, Mohammed Sheriff (SAN), Aregbesola challenged the decision invalidating his emergence as National Secretary and the resolutions of the party’s 99th National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting.
The appeal, made available to journalists on Sunday, listed Nafiu Gombe, the ADC, Senator David Mark, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and Chief Raph Nwosu as the first to fifth respondents, respectively.
Aregbesola urged the appellate court to set aside the decision of the lower court assuming jurisdiction over the dispute concerning his emergence into office and the validity of resolutions reached at the ADC’s 99th NEC meeting.
He also asked the court to strike out the claims against him and those arising from the disputed NEC resolutions if it found that the Federal High Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain them.
In the alternative, the former Osun State Governor sought an order setting aside the findings and orders invalidating his assumption of office as National Secretary and the resolutions of the 99th NEC meeting, insofar as they affected him.
He further asked the appellate court to set aside the declaration that Gombe’s four-year tenure remained subsisting and that he was entitled to oversee the affairs of the ADC.
Aregbesola also requested that if the Court of Appeal upheld the trial court’s jurisdiction but considered a retrial necessary, the affected claims should be returned to the Federal High Court for rehearing before a different judge.
He additionally sought an order awarding the costs of the appeal in his favour.
In the five grounds of appeal presented by Sheriff, Aregbesola argued that Justice Lifu erred in law by treating a challenge involving INEC’s statutory oversight responsibilities as sufficient grounds to determine competing claims to the ADC leadership arising from the 99th NEC meeting.
His counsel contended that the dispute concerned the interpretation of the party’s constitution and the legal distinction between an election into a party office and an interim appointment to fill a vacancy.
Sheriff specifically challenged the trial court’s reliance on Section 82(3) of the Electoral Act 2022 and Section 223(1)(a) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, in invalidating Aregbesola’s assumption of office.
According to the senior lawyer, Section 82(3) regulates elections into party governing bodies, including elections conducted to fill vacancies, while Section 223(1)(a) requires political parties to provide for periodic democratic elections.
However, he maintained that Article 23(4) of the ADC Constitution permits the appropriate executive organ to appoint an eligible replacement pending an election at the next convention or congress.
“The absence of voting did not resolve whether the resolutions effected an election or an interim appointment under the provision relied upon by the appellant. The lower court applied the requirements governing an election to fill a vacancy without first resolving whether the appellant’s assumption of office fell within the interim appointment power asserted under Article 23(4),” Sheriff argued.
In a related development, Aregbesola filed a motion on notice dated November 7, 2026, before the Federal High Court, seeking an order staying the execution of Justice Lifu’s judgment pending the determination of his appeal.
The application, filed by Sheriff in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, contained five reliefs supported by 12 grounds of argument.
Among the reliefs sought was an order staying the execution, enforcement and further consequential steps arising from Orders 7 and 8 of the November 5 judgment.
The lawyer argued that Aregbesola, being dissatisfied with material aspects of the judgment, had exercised his constitutional right of appeal.
He maintained that the appeal raised substantial and arguable questions of law and fact requiring consideration by the Court of Appeal.
According to Sheriff, the issues include the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court, the proper interpretation of the ADC Constitution and the relevant provisions of the Electoral Act.
The dispute originated from a suit filed by Gombe, who argued that following the resignation of the party’s former National Chairman, Chief Raph Nwosu, he was constitutionally entitled to assume leadership of the ADC.
Gombe consequently asked the Federal High Court to invalidate all actions taken by the Mark-led leadership and restrain Mark, Aregbesola and other members of their interim National Working Committee from presenting themselves as the party’s valid leaders.
He maintained that their emergence violated the ADC Constitution and relevant provisions of the Electoral Act.
In the suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, Gombe named the ADC, INEC, Mark, Aregbesola and Nwosu as the first to fifth defendants, respectively.
However, Mark, Aregbesola and other defendants opposed the claims, arguing that Gombe was no longer a Deputy National Chairman of the party when Nwosu resigned.
They consequently urged the court to dismiss the suit.
Justice Lifu subsequently delivered judgment on November 5, nullifying the emergence of the Mark-led leadership, a decision Aregbesola is now challenging before the Court of Appeal while also seeking to suspend its enforcement pending the outcome of the appellate proceedings.
Post Title: “Federal High Court Lacked Jurisdiction” — Aregbesola Appeals Judgment Nullifying David Mark-Led ADC Leadership, Seeks Stay Of Execution By Naijaonpoint.