APC aspirant Fubara Dagogo fined N20m as court dismisses suit challenging party congress
The Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday dismissed a suit filed by Fubara Dagogo, a member of the APC, seeking to invalidate the party’s recently concluded national congress over his alleged exclusion from the process.
The Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday dismissed a suit filed by Fubara Dagogo, a member of the APC, seeking to invalidate the party’s recently concluded national congress over his alleged exclusion from the process.
Delivering judgment, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik held that the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter, describing it as an internal affair of a political party and therefore non-justiciable.
The judge ruled that issues relating to the nomination of candidates, including the purchase and issuance of expression of interest and nomination forms, fall within the domestic jurisdiction of political parties.
Justice Abdulmalik subsequently struck out the suit and awarded N10 million costs each against Dagogo and his counsel, Ogochukwu Onyema, bringing the total penalty to N20 million in favour of the four defendants.
Dagogo, who contested for the position of APC National Vice Chairman (South South) at the party’s congress, had approached the court to challenge what he described as his unlawful exclusion despite allegedly paying for and obtaining clearance to participate in the process.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/591/2026 and filed on March 23, named the APC; its National Chairman, Nentawe Yilwatda; National Vice Chairman (South South), Victor Giadom; and National Organising Secretary, Sulaiman Muitamma, as defendants.
Among the reliefs sought, Dagogo asked the court to nullify the outcome of the South South zonal congress conducted without his participation and to declare him entitled to the nomination forms based on evidence of payment acknowledged by the party.
He also sought N100 million in damages against Giadom and Muitamma for alleged embarrassment, discomfiture and mental distress arising from his exclusion.
However, the APC, through its counsel, Kayode Okunade, challenged the competence of the suit, arguing that the dispute concerned the internal management of the party and was therefore outside the court’s jurisdiction.
The defence further argued that Dagogo lacked the legal standing to institute the action, had failed to exhaust the party’s internal dispute resolution mechanisms, and disclosed no reasonable cause of action.
In its ruling, the court upheld the APC’s preliminary objection, reinforcing judicial precedent that courts will generally not interfere in the internal affairs and nomination processes of political parties.
