ADC Alleges Judicial Manipulation in Leadership Suit, Faults Indefinite Adjournment

TDThe African Democratic Congress (ADC) has raised concerns over what it described as attempts to manipulate the judiciary in an ongoing leadership dispute involving Nafiu Bala Gombe and the party’s National Working Committee led by former Senate President David Mark.

In a statement issued on Friday, the party’s National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, questioned the decision by lawyers representing Nafiu Bala Gombe to seek the reassignment of the case to another judge.

According to the ADC, the move contradicts the spirit of speedy adjudication reportedly directed by higher courts and suggests an effort to influence the judicial process.

The party described the request for reassignment and indefinite adjournment as “curious” and “laughable,” arguing that a litigant genuinely seeking justice should welcome an expedited hearing rather than delay proceedings.

The statement alleged that unnamed agents within the Federal Government were attempting to interfere in the judicial process by influencing which judge would preside over the matter.

“The African Democratic Congress would like to reiterate our fears that some agents of the Federal Government are making frantic efforts to manipulate the judiciary by switching the judge in the leadership matter involving Nafiu Bala,” the statement read.

ADC further claimed that the request to transfer the case confirms its fears of a “sinister plot” allegedly involving political operatives seeking a favourable outcome through judicial reassignment.

The party accused Bala and his associates of attempting to turn the judiciary into “a shopping mall where you pick and choose judges suitable for your political schemes.”

It maintained that no litigant has the right to dictate which judge hears a matter simply because proceedings are not progressing in their favour.

The ADC also expressed concern over the alleged request for an indefinite adjournment, arguing that it runs contrary to directives from the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court for speedy trial of the matter.

According to the statement, efforts to delay proceedings amount to attempts to stall the case until a preferred judge can be secured.

The opposition party warned that political interference and “forum shopping” could damage public confidence in the judiciary if left unchecked.

While reaffirming its commitment to the rule of law, the ADC called on judicial officers to remain independent and resist what it termed orchestrated attempts to influence court proceedings.