THE Federal High Court has struck out a lawsuit challenging the conduct of the national congress of the All Progressives Congress, ruling that the matter concerns the party’s internal affairs and is therefore beyond the court’s jurisdiction.
Delivering judgment today, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik held that disputes arising from party congresses and nomination processes are not matters the court can entertain under Section 83(5) of the Electoral Act 2026.
The judge also imposed a total fine of N20 million against the plaintiff, Fubara Dagogo, and his lawyer, Ogochukwu Onyema.
Dagogo was ordered to pay N10 million, while another N10 million was awarded against his counsel.
According to the court, the case stemmed from the APC’s internal congress activities and leadership selection process, making it a non-justiciable political dispute.
Justice Abdulmalik stated that once the court determined it lacked jurisdiction, every other issue raised in the suit automatically became irrelevant and academic.
Dagogo, an aspirant in the APC national congress, had approached the court over his alleged exclusion from the party’s national convention election despite reportedly purchasing and completing the required nomination forms.
The suit was filed against the APC, alongside party officials including Nentawe Yilwatda, Victor Giadom, and Sulaiman Muitamma.
The legal action followed the APC zonal congresses conducted across the six geopolitical zones on March 21 and the party’s national convention held between March 25 and March 28.
Through his lawyer, Onyema, Dagogo claimed he had been duly screened and cleared after paying for his expression of interest and nomination forms but was later shut out of the process.
He asked the court to nullify the outcome of the congress for the office of National Vice Chairman (South-South) and also demanded N100 million in damages.
However, counsel to the APC and other defendants, Kayode Okunade, challenged the suit through a preliminary objection, arguing that the issues raised were strictly internal party matters which the courts are prohibited from interfering in.
Okunade also argued that Dagogo failed to exhaust the party’s internal dispute resolution mechanisms and lacked the legal standing to institute the case.
In response, Onyema maintained that the matter involved alleged violations of fair hearing and statutory procedures, urging the court to dismiss the objection.
In the ruling, Justice Abdulmalik reaffirmed that political parties are voluntary organisations whose internal operations are generally protected from judicial interference unless there is a clear breach of statutory provisions.
Quoting Section 83(5) of the Electoral Act, the judge stressed that no Nigerian court has jurisdiction over disputes relating to the internal affairs of political parties, including nomination and congress processes.
