NBA Threatens to Discipline Nafiu Gombe’s Lawyer, others Who Deliberately File Frivolous Ex Parte Motions to Interfere in Intra-party Affairs

Adhering to calls by eminent legal minds in Nigeria to intervene in the ongoing judicial rascalities in the country, the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) led by Mazi Afam Osigwe, has threatened to take firm steps to deter such conducts.

In a statement on Friday, Afam Osigwe stated that “Lawyers who deliberately file actions aimed at procuring judicial interference in intra-party affairs, or who seek ex parte or interlocutory orders in clear violation of statutory provisions, risk facing disciplinary proceedings. We will not hesitate to present petitions before the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) against any Legal Practitioner found to be engaging in such conduct. This will be pursued decisively to serve as a deterrent and to preserve the sanctity of the judicial process.”

Recall that on September 4, 2025, Justice Emeka Nwite of a Federal High Court in Abuja, declined to grant an application seeking to stop the Senator David Mark-led leadership of the main opposition African Democratic Congress (ADC), pending the hearing of the substantive suit.

The judge had refused the three prayers sought in the ex parte motion filed by Mr Gombe, a former deputy national chairman of ADC, and moved by his lawyer, Michael Agber.

Rather, Justice Nwite had directed Gombe, the plaintiff in the suit, to put all the defendants on notice to show cause why the motion should not be granted.

The judge then adjourned the matter until September 15, 2025, for the defendants to show cause.

However, the Mark-led ADC approached the Appeal Court to challenge the lower court’s jurisdictional power to hear the suit, and the appellate court ordered the parties to go back to the trial court and maintained the status quo ante bellum pending the determination of the case.

Gombe, in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, had sued ADC, Mark, Aregbesola, INEC, and Chief Ralph Nwosu as 1st to 5th defendants, respectively.

Attached is the document: