Court Dismisses Suit Seeking to Stop Senator Ireti Kingibe from ADC Activities

By Folarin Aluko

A Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a suit seeking to stop Senator Ireti Kingibe from participating in ADC activities, ruling that party discipline and suspension are internal matters that do not require court intervention.

The Federal High Court in Abuja has struck out a lawsuit seeking to bar Senator Ireti Kingibe from participating in the activities of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), ruling that the matter falls strictly within the party’s internal affairs.

Delivering judgment on Friday, Justice Peter Odo Lifu held that issues relating to discipline, suspension and internal party disputes do not require judicial interference except in situations clearly recognized by law.

The court described the suit against the Federal Capital Territory senator as frivolous, baseless and lacking legal merit. The case stemmed from the alleged suspension of Kingibe by the Wuse Ward Executive of the ADC in Abuja on March 10, 2026.

According to party members who initiated the legal action, the suspension was based on allegations of anti-party activities, gross misconduct and disregard for the party’s constitution.

The plaintiffs in the suit Okezuo Godfrey Anayo and Isaiah Ojonugwa Samuel claimed to be acting on behalf of themselves and other ward members.

Through their lawyer, Senior Advocate of Nigeria Kolawole Olowookere, they asked the court to issue an interim injunction preventing Kingibe from presenting herself as a member of the ADC pending the determination of the substantive case.

They also sought an order restraining the senator from attending ADC meetings, representing the party publicly, participating in party activities or interfering with ward administration and records.

The plaintiffs argued that the suspension process followed constitutional procedures within the party and was allegedly ratified by a two-thirds majority of the ward executive members.

According to them, despite being informed of the suspension, Kingibe allegedly continued to hold meetings, issue public statements in the name of the ADC and interfere in party affairs.

They further accused the senator of using her security details to intimidate ward executives.

However, Justice Lifu questioned the logic behind party officials approaching the court to seek validation for disciplinary actions they had already taken internally.

The judge stated that if any legal challenge was to arise from the suspension, it should ordinarily come from the suspended party member  not from those who carried out the disciplinary action. “The plaintiffs are not sure of themselves in their own action, hence they rushed to court,” the judge reportedly stated during the ruling.

Justice Lifu subsequently dismissed the case and invoked Sections 82 and 83 of the Electoral Act in imposing sanctions on the plaintiffs. The court ordered the plaintiffs to jointly pay ₦10 million in damages to Senator Kingibe for filing what it described as a frivolous suit.

In addition, the judge imposed another ₦10 million fine on the lawyer who filed the case on behalf of the plaintiffs, directing that the amount also be paid to the senator.

The ruling has drawn attention to the limits of judicial involvement in political party disputes and internal disciplinary matters in Nigeria’s political system.

Legal analysts say the judgment reinforces the longstanding position of Nigerian courts that political parties generally retain the authority to manage their internal affairs, including disciplinary processes, without unnecessary external interference.

Senator Kingibe, who represents the Federal Capital Territory in the Senate, remains one of the prominent political figures within the ADC and has continued to attract national attention over her political activities and outspoken positions on governance issues.

The case also comes amid broader political tensions and internal struggles within several Nigerian political parties ahead of the 2027 general elections.

As preparations for the next election cycle intensify, disputes over party structures, candidate positioning and internal leadership battles are increasingly becoming common across multiple political platforms.

The court’s decision is expected to influence how similar intra-party disputes are approached moving forward, especially concerning the role of the judiciary in party disciplinary matters.