The National Legal Adviser of the New Nigeria Peoples Party, NNPP, Magaji Mato (SAN), has clarified the legal implication of a court order directing parties to maintain the “status quo” amid the ongoing leadership dispute in the African Democratic Congress, ADC.
Speaking on Wednesday, Mato said the term has a clear and uniform meaning in law, stressing that it requires parties to remain in the position they occupied before approaching the court.
He explained that such an order is typically issued when there is a dispute before the court, directing all parties to maintain existing arrangements pending the determination of the substantive suit.
According to him, if the ADC leadership was under Senator David Mark before the matter was instituted in court, an order to maintain the status quo implies that the leadership structure should remain unchanged until the court delivers a final ruling.
Mato noted that the essence of the order is to ensure continuity and prevent disruption while the case is being heard.
He further stated that courts are obligated to preserve the subject matter of litigation at the interlocutory stage, rather than take steps that could preempt or undermine the final decision.
He added that any action contrary to maintaining the status quo could amount to prematurely deciding the core issues in contention, which is not the intention of the law at that stage.
Mato said: “In law, when you say parties are to maintain status quo, there cannot be two different interpretations.
“What that simply means is that there is a hostility that led you to come before us the judges. We are now saying, pending when we listen to the matter to the substantive matter which you brought before us to determine the rights of the parties before us, go and maintain status quo, which means go and stay where you are and continue operating where you are.
“So if the leadership of ADC has been led by Senator David Mark before going to court by Nafiu Gombe, then if the Court of Appeal has made that pronouncement to say, go and maintain status quo, what that simply means is that ‘go and continue with the David Mark-led leadership, pending the determination to know who actually is the leader’. This is because the system must go on.
“The court must always maintain the case, safeguard the case which is the subject matter of litigation. The court cannot destroy the subject matter of litigation at interim or interlocutory stage.
“The court is always expected to grant an order that will give life to the substance that is to be determined by them.
“If the court says it is no longer this, then that means the court itself has determined the final subject matter, and that is not the intendment of the law at the interlocutory stage. What the court is to do is to preserve the case, and not any other thing.”
