A High Court in Katsina State, presided over by Justice A. K. Tukur, has granted an interim injunction halting all activities of the African Democratic Congress in the state pending the hearing and determination of a lawsuit.
The court order, dated April 7, 2026, was issued upon hearing a motion ex parte filed and moved by Abubakar Salihu Esq., counsel to the plaintiff/applicant.
The lawsuit was filed by the party’s state chairman, Usman Wamba, against some party members, the African Democratic Congress, and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
1st Defendant: Lawan Batagarawa (for himself and on behalf of so-called stakeholders of ADC, Katsina State)
2nd Defendant: Babangida lbrahim Mahuta
3rd Defendant: African Democratic Congress (Headquarters at No. 121 Ademola Adetokunbo Crescent, Wuse 2, Abuja)
4th Defendant: Independent National Electoral Commission (Plot 436 Zambezi Crescent, Maitama, Abuja)
The court granted all the reliefs sought by the plaintiff as prayed.
First Order:
The court issued an order of interim injunction restraining the 1st and 2nd defendants/respondents, whether by themselves, their agents, or privies, from parading themselves as African Democratic Congress Katsina State Stakeholders or in any manner conducting the affairs of the Katsina State Chapter of the ADC by usurping the position of the plaintiff/applicant as the Chairman of the African Democratic Congress Katsina State Chapter, pending the hearing and determination of the notice filed before the Court.
Second Order:
The court issued an order of interim injunction restraining the 3rd and 4th defendants/respondents (ADC and INEC) from recognising, taking part in, supervising, or endorsing any congress organised by the 1st and 2nd defendants/respondents for the Katsina State Chapter of the ADC or any part thereof, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.
Third Order:
The court ordered an interim injunction restraining the respondents from taking further steps in connection with the subject matter of the suit by mandating the defendants/respondents to maintain status quo and staying all actions in relation to Katsina State ADC congress, the subject matter of the suit, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.
The court also granted leave to the plaintiff/applicant to issue and serve the defendants with the originating summons outside the jurisdiction of the court, specifically in FCT Abuja.
Additionally, the court appointed DHL Courier service provider as bailiff to serve the originating process and other processes in the suit on the defendants.
The court fixed April 15, 2026, for the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.
“In the light of the above circumstances all the reliefs sought are hereby granted as prayed; The Status quo be maintained pending hearing and determination of the motion on notice on the 15th day of April, 2026” the Court ordered.
The Katsina High Court order adds yet another layer oflegal complexity to the already embattled African Democratic Congress.
The party, which was adopted as the coalition platform for opposition figures seeking to challenge President Bola Tinubu in 2027, is now facing court injunctions at multiple levels – Federal and State.
This latest order from Katsina State effectively:
1. Freezes all ADC activities in Katsina: No congresses, meetings, or party activities can take place until the court determines the matter.
2. Restrains INEC: The Electoral Commission cannot recognise, supervise, or endorse any congress organised by the defendants for the Katsina State Chapter.
3. Protects Wamba’s position: The rival faction led by Lawan Batagaravwa cannot parade themselves as stakeholders or conduct party affairs.
4. Maintains status quo: All parties must maintain the existing situation until April 15.
For the ADC’s planned National Convention and congresses scheduled for April 9-14, this court order creates additional complications. Any congress held in Katsina State would be in violation of the court order.
The proliferation of court cases at both Federal and State levels – with the Federal High Court, Court of Appeal, and now State High Courts issuing various orders illustrates the depth of the crisis engulfing the party.
For INEC, already grappling with conflicting orders from the Court of Appeal regarding the National leadership dispute, this state-level injunction adds another restraining order to navigate.
The ADC crisis continues to demonstrate how internal party disputes, when unresolved through internal mechanisms, can metastasise into multiple legal battle that effectively paralyse political organisations.
