THE COURT of Appeal sitting in Makurdi on Wednesday delivered decisions that effectively brought closure to the long-running leadership dispute within the Benue State chapter of the All Progressives Congress (APC), while also reaffirming the earlier judicial findings that questioned the legality of the party’s former caretaker arrangement.
In one of the matters, the appellate court struck out a notice of appeal filed by the current Benue APC Chairman, Dr Benjamin Omale, against a lower court judgment that had recognised Augustine Agada as the state chairman of the party.
The appeal was withdrawn after developments overtook the substance of the dispute.
The court was informed that the tenure of the Agada-led executive had since expired and that a fresh APC State Congress had been conducted, producing Omale as the substantive state chairman.
On that basis, Omale applied to withdraw the appeal, arguing that there was no longer a live issue requiring judicial determination. The Court of Appeal granted the application and struck out the case, directing each party to bear its own costs.
However, in a separate appeal arising from the same leadership crisis, the Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment of the Benue State High Court which had nullified the dissolution of the Augustine Agada-led State Executive Committee by the APC National Working Committee (NWC).
The appellate court dismissed the appeal filed by the APC and upheld the decision of Justice T. A. Kume, who had ruled that the dissolution of the Agada-led executive was unlawful.
The court further sustained the consequential order declaring all actions taken by the Benjamin Omale-led caretaker committee null, void and of no effect.
The ruling represents a judicial endorsement of the position that the Agada-led executive remained the lawful leadership structure during the period in dispute, notwithstanding its eventual expiration and the conduct of a fresh state congress that produced a new executive under Omale.
Reacting to the development, Agada welcomed the judgment and urged party members to remain united, while APC stakeholders noted that the expiration of the former executive’s tenure had largely rendered aspects of the litigation academic.
The judgments bring an end to years of internal legal battles over the control and administration of the APC in Benue State, although questions may still arise regarding the legal consequences of actions taken during the period when the caretaker committee was in operation.
Possible Legal Implications For The Benue APC Primaries
Based on established Nigerian electoral jurisprudence and the information presently available, the immediate effect of the judgment is not automatically to invalidate the APC’s recent governorship, National Assembly or House of Assembly primaries. However, it may provide fresh grounds for litigation by aggrieved aspirants.
The critical issue is whether any of the recently conducted primaries were initiated, supervised, authorised or ratified through structures that can be traced to actions of the caretaker committee which the Court of Appeal has now affirmed were “null and void.”
Potential challengers could argue: one; that the party organs that set the timetable, screened aspirants or coordinated the primaries lacked legal foundation if their authority flowed from the caretaker committee.
Two, that delegates’ lists, ward structures or congress outcomes used for the primaries may be tainted if they originated from decisions taken during the period declared unlawful.
Three, that the APC’s nomination process failed to comply with its constitution and internal rules because it relied on officers whose appointments have now been judicially invalidated.
Whether such arguments succeed would depend on the specific facts of each primary and on evidence showing a direct connection between the disputed caretaker structure and the nomination process.
Why The Judgment May Not Automatically Threaten APC Candidates
There are also strong counter-arguments available to the APC.
First, the same Court of Appeal has acknowledged that the Agada executive’s tenure has expired and that a fresh state congress has produced a substantive Omale-led executive. This significantly changes the factual situation from what existed during the original dispute.
Second, Nigerian courts are often reluctant to overturn nominations where subsequent lawful processes have intervened and where disputes have become overtaken by events, particularly if the party has already regularised its structures before the general election.
Third, APC lawyers may contend that any defects were cured by subsequent congresses, ratifications or approvals from recognised national party organs.
Political implications
Politically, the judgments hand a moral and legal victory to supporters of Augustine Agada, whose position that the caretaker committee was unlawfully imposed has now been substantially vindicated by the appellate court.
Within the Benue APC, this could: renew factional tensions between Agada loyalists and the current leadership; encourage aspirants who lost the governorship or legislative primaries to revisit the courts; increase pressure on the party leadership to reconcile competing blocs before the 2027 election cycle; and, provide opposition parties with a narrative that APC’s nomination processes were conducted amid unresolved internal legality issues.
The Zamfara Precedent
The comparison many lawyers and politicians are likely to make is the 2019 APC crisis in Zamfara State, where failures in the party’s nomination process ultimately led to the loss of all elective positions won by the party after judicial intervention.
However, it would be premature to conclude that Benue faces a similar outcome. The Zamfara case turned on specific findings that valid primaries had not been conducted at all. For Benue, the key question would be whether the recent primaries were conducted by legally competent party organs and whether any identified defects are substantial enough to affect the validity of nominations.
Bottom line
The Court of Appeal’s decisions appear to close the chapter on who lawfully led the Benue APC during the disputed period, but they may open a new chapter regarding the legal status of actions taken under the caretaker arrangement.
The greatest risk is not to the party’s current leadership position – which has since been regularised – but to any governorship, Senate, House of Representatives or House of Assembly nominations that can be shown to have depended materially on decisions of structures now judicially declared unlawful.
Whether that risk becomes a real electoral threat will depend on whether aggrieved aspirants file challenges and on the specific evidence presented before the courts.
