The Federal High Court in Abuja has rejected a controversial resignation letter allegedly written by former African Democratic Congress (ADC) Deputy National Chairman, Nafiu Bala, ruling that the document was not genuine.
Justice Peter Lifu, in a judgment delivered on November 5, 2026, held that the disputed letter relied upon by the faction led by former Senate President David Mark could not be accepted as reliable evidence that Bala voluntarily resigned from his position in the party.
The court’s findings were contained in a Certified True Copy of the judgment obtained by a correspondent on Wednesday.
In examining the document, identified as Exhibit ADC-1, Justice Lifu compared the signature on the purported resignation letter with signatures appearing on Bala’s witness statements on oath.
He found material differences between them and concluded that the disputed signature had not been established as genuine.
The judge also clarified that the certification of a document by an authorised institution does not automatically prove that the signature it carries belongs to the person named in it.
According to him, certification may establish that a copy accurately reflects a document held by the certifying authority, but it does not settle a genuine dispute over whether the individual concerned actually signed it.
He said:
“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.”
Justice Lifu added that courts could compare disputed signatures with admitted or otherwise established specimens without necessarily requiring expert testimony in every case.
Explaining his decision, he said he was not satisfied that the document represented Bala’s genuine act and therefore rejected it as proof of his voluntary resignation.
“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 disputed resignation letter is central to the prolonged leadership crisis within the ADC, which began after the emergence of the David Mark-led leadership structure.
Bala approached the court in September 2025, challenging the legitimacy of the arrangement 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, and that his resignation was subsequently communicated to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
Bala, however, repeatedly denied authoring the letter, insisting that the document and the signature attributed to him were forged.
In April 2026, he publicly disowned the resignation letter, maintaining that he had never submitted such a document.
“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.
Beyond the disputed resignation, Justice Lifu also examined the process through which Mark and Aregbesola emerged as leaders of the party.
The judge held that their emergence at the ADC’s 99th National Executive Committee meeting on July 27, 2025, had not been shown to satisfy the statutory requirement for democratic election under Section 82(3) of the Electoral Act 2022.
He further maintained that the powers of the party’s National Executive Committee and INEC’s subsequent recognition of the leadership arrangement could not replace compliance with the law.
The judgment has added another major development to the ADC’s internal leadership dispute, particularly as the Mark-led faction has rejected the decision and indicated its intention to appeal.
It also raises further questions about the party’s preparations for the 2027 general election, including the legal position of its leadership and the reported consequences for the nomination of former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar as its presidential candidate.
The dispute is expected to remain a significant legal and political issue as the parties consider their next steps.
How did this story make you feel?
Join the conversation
Share a thoughtful response. Submissions may be reviewed before appearing.
