A Federal High Court in Abuja has once again adjourned indefinitely a suit filed by African Democratic Congress (ADC) chieftain Nafiu Bala Gombe after the plaintiff requested that the matter be reassigned to another judge.
Justice Emeka Nwite ordered the indefinite adjournment following disagreements between parties over a letter the plaintiff addressed to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court seeking transfer of the case.
During Friday’s proceedings, counsel to the plaintiff, Luka Haruna, informed the court that the Supreme Court had delivered judgment in the interlocutory appeal on April 30.
Haruna said the apex court dismissed the appeal for lacking merit and also vacated the Court of Appeal’s order staying proceedings in the substantive matter.
He further disclosed that the plaintiff, through a letter dated May 4, 2026, had requested the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court to transfer the suit to another judge.
According to him, the letter had already been forwarded to the court registrar, and he urged Justice Nwite to await the administrative decision of the Chief Judge.
The application was strongly opposed by the defence team, which accused the plaintiff of trying to delay the accelerated hearing earlier ordered by the Court of Appeal and affirmed by the Supreme Court.
Counsel to the first defendant, Realwan Okpanachi, who represented Shuaibu Aruwa, argued that the plaintiff had mischaracterised the Supreme Court ruling.
He maintained that the apex court partly allowed the appeal and specifically upheld the directive for accelerated hearing of the substantive case.
Okpanachi also criticised the plaintiff for allegedly ambushing the defence with the transfer request, insisting that the move was aimed at frustrating the accelerated hearing order.
The senior lawyer stressed that litigants do not have the right to choose which judge hears their cases.
He, however, urged the court to retain the earlier order adjourning the matter sine die pending the filing of the Certified True Copy of the Supreme Court judgment.
Counsel to the second defendant, Sulaiman Usman, also criticised the plaintiff’s action, describing it as “forum shopping and judge shopping”.
Usman told the court that the Supreme Court had praised Justice Nwite for the manner in which he handled the proceedings.
In response, Haruna faulted the defence for attacking a letter they had not seen, insisting that the plaintiff stood by the request.
In his ruling, Justice Nwite held that the court could not act on the letter without hearing from all parties involved.
“Taking a decision or any action in such a letter without hearing from the defendants will amount to a breach of their fundamental right in this suit,” the judge ruled.
He further stated that since the letter was addressed to the Chief Judge, the trial court could not make pronouncements on it.
“This matter is best adjourned sine die to afford the parties the opportunity to properly file a Certified True Copy of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the interlocutory appeal in the suit, kto serve the defendants with the letter addressed to the Honourable Chief Judge, and finally to await further or any directive from the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court,” Justice Nwite said.
The matter was subsequently adjourned indefinitely.