0
0
There is no way the Supreme Court will rule in favor of Nafiu Bala or against David Mark today, looking at the following eleven similar cases where it has been clearly stated that, in whatsoever form, courts have no jurisdiction to hear matters relating to party internal disputes.
1. Usman v. Labour Party (2025) 16 NWLR (Pt. 2010) 101 — The Supreme Court set aside an appellate ruling on party leadership, holding that leadership disputes in political parties are internal affairs.
2. Anyanwu v. Emmanuel & Ors (2025) LPELR-80882(SC) — The Court held that issues of leadership and membership are “no-go areas” for the courts.
3. Kabir v. APC (2024) — Reaffirmed that political parties, as voluntary associations, have supreme authority over their internal domestic affairs.
4. Abdullahi v. Argungu (2023) — Reiterated the lack of judicial jurisdiction over party leadership and administration.
5. Mutfwang v. APC (2024) — Although an election matter, the Court held that nomination processes remain internal party affairs not suitable for litigation.
6. Onuoha v. Okafor (1983) 2 SCNLR 244 — Established that sponsorship of candidates is a political question beyond judicial intervention.
7. Dalhatu v. Turaki (2003) 15 NWLR (Pt. 843) 310 — Reaffirmed that courts lack jurisdiction over internal party processes.
8. Lado v. CPC (2011) 18 NWLR (Pt. 1279) 689 — Held that nomination of candidates is a domestic affair of the party.
9. PDP v. Sylva (2012) 13 NWLR (Pt. 1316) 85 — Confirmed that no candidate can be imposed on a political party by the courts.
10. Emenike v. PDP (2012) 12 NWLR (Pt. 1315) 556 — Affirmed that courts cannot interfere in how parties manage internal disputes.
These authorities consistently establish that party leadership, membership, and nomination issues are internal matters beyond the jurisdiction of the courts. The implication is clear: the Supreme Court is most likely to strike out the case for want of jurisdiction, in line with its well-settled and repeatedly affirmed legal position.
But things may change if political influences or intimidation were allowed by presiding judges as seen in certain lower court decisions and actions of INEC.
✍️ ADC Media Organization
22/04/2026.
SB E-news.
Related posts:
PRESIDENT TINUBU UNVEILS PLAN FOR MASSIVE INVESTMENTS IN HEALTH SECTOR www.sbenews.com.ng www.effici...
FLAMINGOS LOSE 0-2 TO USA, CRASHES OUT OF U-17 WOMEN’S WORLD CUP www.sbenews.com.ng www.efficiency.c...
PRESIDENT TINUBU APPOINTS SHAMSELDEEN BABATUNDE OGUNJIMI AS THE ACTING ACCOUNTANT GENERAL OF THE FED...
About the Author
