The Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a purported resignation letter attributed to former African Democratic Congress Deputy National Chairman, Nafiu Bala, ruling that the document was not authentic.
Justice Peter Lifu gave the ruling on Thursday, November 5, while delivering judgment in a suit challenging the legitimacy of the party’s leadership led by former Senate President, David Mark.
The judge, according to a Certified True Copy of the judgment obtained by our correspondent on Wednesday, said his comparison of the signature on the disputed letter with those on Bala’s witness statements on oath revealed significant discrepancies.
Justice Lifu held that the document, which the Mark-led faction relied upon to establish that Bala had relinquished his position, could not be accepted as credible evidence of his resignation.
The judge also clarified that the certification of a document did not automatically authenticate a disputed signature, stressing that the court had to assess the document alongside other relevant evidence.
“The fact that a document is certified, however, does not, by that fact alone, settle a genuine dispute as to whether the person named in it, actually signed it.
“Certification may establish the status of the copy as a true copy of the document in the custody of the certifying authority; it does not necessarily establish the authenticity of the disputed signature.
“The court must therefore consider the document alongside the other relevant evidence,” he held.
Justice Lifu further noted that courts could independently compare disputed signatures with established specimens without necessarily requiring the services of a handwriting expert.
He said he examined the signature on Exhibit ADC-1, the disputed resignation letter, against those contained in Bala’s sworn statements and found them materially different.
The judge consequently ruled that the document could not be regarded as a genuine expression of Bala’s intention to resign from his position in the party.
“I am not satisfied that Exhibit ADC-1 represents the genuine act of the plaintiff.
“I therefore reject it as reliable proof that the plaintiff voluntarily resigned from his position as Deputy National Chairman of the 1st defendant (ADC),” the judge ruled.
The decision is part of the prolonged leadership crisis within the ADC, which has resulted in the nullification of the emergence of the Mark-led leadership and the party’s nomination of former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar as its presidential candidate for the 2027 general election.
Bala instituted the suit in September 2025, contesting the legitimacy of the leadership structure that produced Mark as national chairman and Rauf Aregbesola as national secretary.
The Mark-led faction had argued that Bala resigned on May 17, 2025, claiming that his resignation was subsequently communicated to the Independent National Electoral Commission.
However, Bala consistently denied signing the letter, alleging that the document was forged.
In April 2026, the former deputy national chairman publicly disowned the letter, insisting that he was not responsible for its contents or the signature attached to it.
“I wish to state that this paper did not come from me, and that is not my signature on it. The signature you see there was forged,” he said.
The court’s rejection of the document undermined a key argument by the Mark-led faction that Bala had voluntarily vacated his position before the party’s leadership transition.
Justice Lifu also ruled that the emergence of Mark and Aregbesola at the ADC’s 99th National Executive Committee meeting on July 27, 2025, had not been established to have complied with the mandatory democratic election requirement under Section 82(3) of the Electoral Act 2022.
According to the judge, the party’s reliance on the powers of its National Executive Committee and INEC’s subsequent recognition of the leadership arrangement could not override the statutory provisions.
The judgment has further deepened the uncertainty surrounding the ADC’s leadership, as the Mark-led faction has rejected the ruling and indicated plans to appeal.
The party’s preparations for the 2027 general election have also been thrown into further uncertainty, particularly following the nullification of Atiku’s nomination.
