ADC chieftain drags FHC Chief Judge, others to court over aleged bias 

The National Welfare Secretary of the African Democratic Congress, ADC, Nkemakolam Ukandu, has dragged the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, FHC, Justice John Tsoho, a judge of the court in Abuja, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik and a court bailiff, Moses Bentu, to a High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, FCT, over alleged bias in the hearing of the party’s case at the court.

The claimant is asking the FCT High Court to void the reassignment of a suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025, by Justice Tsoho to Justice Abdulmalik, for being in disobedience of an order of the FCT High Court.

The claimant is challenging the continued hearing of the case filed by a faction of the ADC led by Dumebi Kachikwu by Justice Abdulmalik, over alleged manifest bias.

It will be recalled that Kachikwu, Adikwu Elias, Etimbuk Umoh, Muhammad Khala, and Alakum William had sued the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, ADC, Chief Ralph Nwosu, Senator David Mark, Rauf Aregbesola, over the leadership of the ADC.

Following an application in July last year, Justice Abdulmalik had joined the claimant as the 6th respondent in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025.

Ukandu stated that problem however started when the judge came down heavily on his counsel at the proceedings of October 23, 2025, for not filing response to the originating summons served on him barely 24 hours by plaintiffs’ counsel and then abridged time of response from 30 days to seven, including Saturday and Sunday.

“The claimant being dissatisfied with the Ruling, petitioned the 2nd defendant against the said ruling and demanded for a transfer of his case to another Judge on grounds of manifest bias/grave likelihood of bias on the part of the Court against the claimant.

“The claimant thereafter filed a Notice of Appeal, compiled and transmitted Record of Appeal and the appeal entered at the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division.

“In addition the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division has given March 2, 2026 for the hearing of the claimant’s application,” Ukandu averred in a 42 paragraph statement of claim.

He lamented that further that the CJ in a letter dated November 7, 2025, and addressed to the claimant’s counsel directed the court to proceed with the hearing of the matter despite a pending appeal at the Court of Appeal, a development which led the claimant to file an action against the 2nd defendant in suit No: FCT/HC/CV/4684/2025: Nkemakolam Ukandu VS. Justice James Tsoho and two others, “wherein the 2nd defendant was directed to maintain status qou in Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025: Dumebi Kachikwu and four others & VS. INEC and five others”.

Ukandu contended that despite the pendency of the matter and the order of the FCT High Court which directed the 2nd defendant to maintain staus quo in Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025: the 2nd defendant, in disobedience to the said order went ahead and reassigned Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025: to the 1st defendant.

“The claimant avers that the 1st defendant had started presiding over Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025: despite taking judicial notice of the pending suit at the FCT High Court and the order endorsed ex-facie the said Writ of Summons,” he added.

Besides, the claimant averred that Justice Abdulmalik went ahead to hear the matter on January 30, 2026, without hearing notice served on his counsel, Kalu Kalu Agu.

According to him, the 3rd defendant filed a purported certificate of service of the hearing notice of January 30, 2026 purportedly served on the claimant’s counsel in the 1st defendant’s file.

“The claimant avers that the endorsement at the back of the hearing notice purportedly served on the claimant’s counsel for the proceedings of January 30, 2026 was done by a none existent person.

“The claimant contends that the same spurious certificate of service of the proceedings of January 30, 2026 was also filed on behalf of the 5th defendant in Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025”.

While accusing Justice Abdulmalik of over looking “these false entries and assumed jurisdiction to hear the matter on January 30, 2026, the claimant stated that the 2nd defendant was “accused by a renowned Professor of Law, Professor Chidi Odinkalu of assigning all political cases that Nyesom Wike has interest in to the 1st defendant to hear and determine”.

“The 1st defendant, in her proceedings of January 30, 2026, had shown disdain to the pending appeal of the claimant at the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division by assuming jurisdiction in the matter despite a pending appeal.

“The defendants are handling the claimant’s matter as if they are untouchable and no judicial consequences for their wrongful actions and/or inactions”, he added.

Amongst the reliefs he is seeking in the suit marked: FCT/HC/CV/619/26 and filed February 12, includes a declaration that the reassignment of suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025 … by the 2nd defendant to the 1st defendant “is unlawful, null and void and of no effects whatsoever as the order of reassignment by the 2nd defendant was made in flagrant disobedience to the order of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, wherein the 2nd defendant was directed to maintain status quo in Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025”

A declaration that the 2nd defendant is bound to obey the order of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory that directed him to maintain status quo in Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025.

A declaration that the 1st defendant being seized of suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025, is unlawful as the controversy in suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025 is now subjudice in Suit No: FCT/HC/CV/4684/2025.

Claimant is also seeking for an order of court setting aside the order of reassignment in Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025 by the 2nd defendant to the 1st defendant … for being an order made by the 2nd defendant in flagrant disobedience to the order of the FCT High Court.

“An order of restraining the 1st Defendant from continuing to preside over Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025.

“An order of court directing the 1st defendant to recuse herself in suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1331/2025 … on grounds of manifest bias/grave likelihood of bias on the part of the 1st and 2nd defendants against the Claimant.

“An order of court directing the 3rd defendant to remove the purported certificate of service on the claimant he submitted to the Registrar of the Federal High Court, Abuja which was acted upon by the 1st defendant against the claimant as same breaches the claimant’s Right to fair hearing”.

ADC chieftain drags FHC Chief Judge, others to court over aleged bias