The Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed April 14 for the hearing of a suit challenging the leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) led by former Senate President, David Mark.

The suit, filed by Nafiu Bala Gombe, seeks to restrain Mark and other party leaders from parading themselves as executives of the party.

Justice Emeka Nwite fixed the date on Friday after hearing notices were issued to all parties involved in the matter.

The case, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, lists the ADC, Mark, former Interior Minister Rauf Aregbesola, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), and former ADC National Chairman, Ralph Nwosu, as defendants.

The matter was previously adjourned indefinitely pending the outcome of an appeal challenging an earlier court order. 

However, the Court of Appeal, in a judgment delivered on March 12, directed all parties to return to the trial court and maintain the status quo pending the determination of the substantive suit.

Following the appellate court’s ruling, INEC reportedly removed the names of Mark and Aregbesola from its portal as the party’s National Chairman and National Secretary.

In response, the Mark-led faction filed a motion on April 7 seeking an order compelling INEC to restore their names on its portal, as well as requesting an accelerated hearing of the case.

Meanwhile, Mark and Aregbesola have filed preliminary objections urging the court to dismiss the suit for lack of jurisdiction.

Mark argued that the plaintiff lacked the legal standing to institute the case, claiming he had resigned his position as Deputy National Chairman of the party. He also maintained that the matter concerned internal party affairs, which he described as non-justiciable.

Similarly, Aregbesola, in a counter-affidavit, described the suit as unmeritorious and urged the court to dismiss it, asking for N50 million in costs against the plaintiff for what he termed a frivolous action.

Also, Nwosu challenged the suit, arguing that it was premature, as the party’s internal dispute resolution mechanisms had not been fully exhausted before approaching the court.