- ADC, INEC draw battleline over de-recognition of party’s leadership ahead congresses, convention
FELIX NWANERI writes on the controversy over the Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC’s) withdrawal of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) ahead of the party’s congresses and national convention
There is no doubt that it was euphoria in some political quarters on July 2, 2025, when notable opposition leaders, announced adoption of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) as the platform they intend to wrest power from the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) in the 2027 general election. The choice of ADC by these opposition leaders, including former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar, ex-Governors Peter Obi; Rotimi Amaech, Nasir El-Rufai and Aminu Tambuwal, among others, was after several back-and-forth movements, including moves that initially linked them with the Social Democratic Party (SDP) and application for registration of a new political party – All Democratic Alliance (ADA).
Adoption of the ADC by the coalition leaders was followed by the voluntary resignation of the Raph Nwosu-led National Working Committee (NWC) of the party to make way for the emergence of David Mark (a former Senate president) and Rauf Aregbesola (a former governor of Osun State) as interim national chairman and interim national secretary, respectively.
However, beyond the jubilation in the opposition camp at the time given the hurdles leaders of the coalition had to scale before arriving at the choice of ADC, some political stakeholders and even analysts, warned that it was too early for them to shout Eureka given the hurdles they must scale if their dream of defeating the APC is to materialize.
The belief was majorly predicated on the presidential ambitions of the coalition’s leaders, which many believed might make it difficult for them to close ranks. Also noted was the power sharing arrangement between the North and South (rotational presidency) as well as the legal battle that ensued over the claim by some chieftains of the ADC that the party was forcefully taken over by the coalition leaders.
INEC’s hammer over legal battle
While the party has been cautious in handling debate on the power sharing arrangement to avoid ruffling feathers within its fold, last week’s de-recognition of the Marl-led national leadership of the party by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has justified the belief in some quarters, way back, that legal impediments would be the party’s biggest hurdle.
Dropping Mark and Aregbesola’s names from its portal as national chairman and national secretary of the ADC respectively, INEC also said it will not recognise a former national deputy chairman of the party, Nafiu Gombe, who had gone to court seeking to be declared national chairman.
The electoral commission explained that its decision was in response to the leadership tussle rocking the party and the recent judgment of the Court of Appeal in Suit No: CA/ABJ/145/2026. It added that it will refrain from monitoring any conventions or congresses organised by the party pending the determination of the substantive suit before the Federal High Court.
Giving more insight into the matter, INEC in a statement by its National Commissioner and Chairman of the Information and Voter Education Committee, Mohammed Haruna, said it received two letters on March 16, but with contradicting positions on the ADC leadership disputes.
We didn’t just wake up one day and took this decision. There was something that led to it. There was an order of court –Amupitan
The commission said the first letter from the law firm of Suleiman Usman SAN & Co. was written on behalf of concerned stakeholders within the party, while the second letter from the law firm of Summit Law Chambers was written on behalf of Gombe. It added that while the letter from Suleiman Usman (SAN) & Co, urged the commission not to recognise Gombe as acting national chairman of the ADC due to a pending suit before the Federal High Court, the correspondence from Summit Law Chambers took a contrary position.
The commission said after a careful consideration of the judgement of the Court of Appeal and the processes filed by parties before the Federal High Court, it observed that several issues have shaped the leadership dispute within the ADC. According to INEC, the current NWC of the ADC emerged from a NEC meeting held on July 29, 2025, after members of the Nwosu-led executive resigned and ratified a new leadership headed by Mark.
It further noted that Gombe, who was vice-national chairman, denied resigning from the party and argued that he ought to have assumed leadership following the resignation of Nwosu in line with the party’s constitution.
The commission said Gombe subsequently approached the Federal High Court on September 2, 2025, seeking an order restraining Mark’s group from parading themselves as national chairman and secretary of the party, as well as an order directing INEC to recognise him as acting national chairman. It also said Gombe sought to stop the commission from recognising or dealing with Mark’s group as officials of the party, adding that motions ex parte and on notice were filed alongside the originating summons, seeking to restrain the commission from recognising Mark’s group.
This is a direct assault on Nigeria’s democracy and the right of Nigerians to participate and exercise their rights as free citizens -Mark
The commission said the motion ex parte was heard on September 4, 2025, after which Justice Emeka Nwite, the presiding judge, directed the respondents, including INEC, to show cause why the application should not be granted. The commission added that Mark appealed the order on December 18, 2025, challenging the jurisdiction of the trial court, but the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on March 12, and issued preservatory orders.
INEC added that Gombe filed another motion on September 15, 2025, seeking to restrain the ADC from holding any convention, congress, conference, or meeting, and to stop INEC from monitoring or recognising any such activities pending the determination of the suit. Following the appellate court judgement, the commission said it received multiple letters from solicitors to both parties, making competing claims to the party’s leadership and issuing various demands.
INEC said it was in line with its obligation to abide strictly by the orders of the court in handling the ADC leadership dispute that it resolved “to maintain the status quo ante bellum as directed by the Court of Appeal based on the facts and position of the parties existing before September 2, 2025, when the case was filed by the plaintiff.” The commission added that it will “refrain from taking any step or doing any act capable of foisting a fait accompli on the court or otherwise rendering nugatory the proceedings before the trial court,” in line with the appellate court’s directive.
“Since the names of the current NWC members led by Senator David Mark were uploaded on September 9, 2025 by INEC (seven days after the suit was instituted), the names would be removed from the INEC portal pursuant to the order of the Court of Appeal to maintain the status quo ante bellum until the matter is decided by the trial court,” INEC said.
The commission however reiterated “its unwavering commitment to neutral ity, impartiality and strict compliance with judicial orders,” urging political parties and stakeholders to act in ways that do not jeopardise the electoral timetable for the 2027 general election.
ADC dares INEC
Reacting to INEC’s derecognition of its leadership, the ADC “the accused the commission’s chairman, Prof. Joash Amupitan and his commissioners of taking side with the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) and called for their resignation as they cannot be trusted to conduct the 2027 general election. Mark, who addressed journalists in Abuja on Thursday alongside other leaders of the ADC, said: “We demand the immediate resignation or sack of the INEC chairman, Prof. Amupitan, and all the National Commissioners.
We no longer have confidence in them. We are convinced that they are incapable of conducting any credible election.” The party did not stop at the resignation call. It dared INEC by vowing that it will go ahead with its congresses and national convention as scheduled. “Let us also make it clear: We are proceeding with our party programmes, because there is nothing under the law that makes INEC’s attendance a mandatory requirement.
We have duly served INEC notice and we will proceed accordingly,” Mark said. He insisted that the leadership of the party, which emerged from its July 29, 2025, NEC meeting, remains valid, adding that the party will continue with its planned congresses and convention, warning that INEC would be held responsible for any fallout arising from its decisions, while urging Nigerians and the international community to take note of what he described as a growing threat to democracy. His words: “We call on Nigerians to defend our democracy.
This is a defining moment. Stand firm. Speak out. Participate. Resist any attempt to impose a one-party state on Nigeria. Nigeria belongs to all of us, and together, we must protect it. “We also call on the international community to take note of INEC’s actions of April 1, and of the restraint we are exercising today. We urge them to recognise the clear threat to Nigeria’s democracy and stability, and to hold accountable those who are undermining the integrity of the electoral process.
Calling out the APC, Mark said what is unfolding is a concerted effort to dismantle that last hope of Nigerians to have an alternative in the forthcoming general election, wondering why a ruling party that claims to have over 30 governors and more than 90 per cent of members of the National Assembly, would be afraid to face the opposition in an election. His words: “It is not the ADC that is under attack.
This is a direct assault on Nigeria’s democracy and the right of Nigerians to choose, participate and exercise their rights as free citizens. We have witnessed how the APC-led Federal Government has undermined, compromised and coerced other opposition political parties.
The ADC has risen as the last bastion between Nigeria’s democracy and full-blown dictatorship. And this is what worries them. “What is now unfolding is a concerted effort to dismantle that last bulwark. If we allow this to happen, it could signal the end of our democracy as we know it. If we yield to it, we would have become complicit by our inaction.
At a time when trust in the electoral process is critical, actions that suggest interference in party affairs only deepen fears of bias and democratic backsliding
We therefore hold it a duty to our democracy and the Nigerian people to say ‘no’. “Right now, I speak to Nigerians at home and in diaspora. I also speak directly to President Bola Tinubu: With 90 per cent of the National Assembly and over 30 of Nigeria’s 36 governors in the APC, President Tinubu, what are you afraid of? If you are convinced that you have done well for the people who voted for you, why are you afraid of a free, fair and transparent electoral contest? If you are indeed the democrat that you claim to be, why are you bent on destroying all opposition political parties? National Publicity Secretary of the party, Bolaji Abdullahi, who reiterated that the party will proceed with its planned congresses and national convention despite uncertainties surrounding recognition by INEC, maintained that the ADC will not halt its internal processes regardless of the commission’s position.
Abdullahi, who expressed concern over what he described as growing threats to Nigeria’s democracy, warned against attempts to limit political competition ahead of the 2027 elections. He said: “If we’re in a military regime, we can understand it.
We are finding ourselves in a situation where everything is being done to ensure that the election in 2027 is a fait acompli, and that Nigerians will be left with no option or no choice but we’ve seen how this has ended in the past.
“So, we are saying that we will go ahead with our congresses. We have given notice of INEC 21 days; they have accepted the notice. Whether they come or not, we’ll continue with our congresses, we’ll continue with our convention. We are all Nigerians. We can see what is going on. We can see our democracy unraveling before our very eyes.”
NEC warns against defying court order
In a swift reaction to the ADC’s position, the chairman of INEC, warned the party against holding its planned congresses and national convention without the commission’s oversight. Prof. Amupitan, who spoke in an interview with Arise Television, said such move could attract legal consequences. He noted that the commission’s decision to derecognise the ADC leadership was anchored on a subsisting court order, not arbitrary discretion.
“If they are going ahead with their congress, with their convention, it’s left for them to look at it, whether it is in contravention of the court. INEC didn’t just take a decision. We didn’t just wake up one day and took this decision.
There was something that led to it. There was an order of court,” he said. The INEC chairman said the court had specifically directed parties to refrain from any action capable of undermining pending proceedings, noting that the question of conducting congresses and convention is already an issue before the courts. Amupitan further cautioned that defying court orders could invalidate election results, with the candidate with the second-highest votes ultimately being declared winner, citing the Zamfara and Plateau states experience after the 2023 elections.
“Let me tell you what happened in Zamfara. It happened in the past. We don’t want to conduct an election without this early warning, and at the end of the day, after you have won, the court again will come and declare the election invalid. And the implication is that the person with the second highest number of vote will be declared the winner. It happened in Plateau State during the last election; failure to obey the court order has consequences,” he said
Nwosu, Kachikwu express divergent views
The immediate National Chairman of the ADC, Nwosu, and the party’s presidential candidate in the 2023 elections, in their separate interventions on the leadership crisis and INEC position, expressed divergent views that speak volume to the fact that legal battle is a landmine the party must avoid. While Nwosu, who handed over leadership of the party to Mark, alleged that the electoral body and the presidency are undermining democratic processes, Kachikwu the unfolding scenario is just the beginning of what is to come.
Describing INEC’s actions as “scandalous,” Nwosu insisted that the commission had been fully involved in the processes that led to the emergence of a new interim leadership. According to him, INEC officials witnessed and supported a series of meetings held over eight months, which culminated in the dissolution of the party’s NWC and the emergence of a new leadership team led by Mark. Nwosu further revealed that Bala, who recently declared himself interim national chairman before resigning, was actively involved in the process.
He noted that Bala attended several meetings and played a key role in promoting the party across the North-East and North-West regions as part of coalitionbuilding efforts. He, however, questioned Bala’s subsequent legal challenge against the process, describing the move as “ridiculous” given his prior involvement. Beyond the internal dispute, Nwosu expressed deeper concerns about what he described as attempts to weaken democratic institutions.
He alleged that external pressures were being applied during the leadership transition, claiming that certain interests sought to ensure that no viable opposition platform would stand. He also took a swipe at the administration of President Bola Tinubu, accusing it of contributing to the erosion of democratic values in the country. Kachikwu, on his part accused Mark and members of his caretaker committee of being sponsored by the APC to destablise the party to pave way for the re-election of President Tinubu.
He also alleged that Nwosu, whose tenure as chairman of the party lapsed since August 21, 2022, sold ADC to ex political office holders, who have held sway over the affairs of Nigeria for the last 40 years. He described Mark and others as “jumping from political party to political party, having no ideology or belief system but standing for nothing and believing only in the notion that power is their birthright.”
He added: “I had long warned that the ADC was bad market and that anyone who attempted to come into the party through the back door would be shown the way out through the windows. What we are seeing today is just the beginning. Several court cases will end at the Supreme Court, and the only way they can win is if the Supreme Court can change Monday to Saturday and Saturday to Tuesday.”
Kachikwu wondered how ADC, the platform he contested in 2023 and would have presented himself again in 2027, suddenly became attractive to Mark and others, who recently joined the party. “There are many who would say that this means that we are now a one-party state, and my immediate response is that we have the PDP, LP, NNPP, AA, AAC, SDP, ADP, APGA, Accord and many other parties out there, so, why the ADC?
“These men, who attempted to hijack our party, have already concluded plans to conduct congresses where forms that were hitherto sold for N50,000 would be sold for N500,000, all in a bid to disenfranchise the poor party faithful, who originally held those positions. “Are they saying that ordinary Nigerians, whom they consider poor, are not good enough to hold party positions in a party where these big men are?
They have long told us that they seek political office to better the lot of the masses, yet they can’t be in a party where the masses hold sway. “I have now accepted that these old men are truly masters of the political game. For them to come into ADC, knowing that there is no pathway here for them, means that there is a conspiracy between these men and the APC to make a fool of us all. “When they came to ADC, it was before different courts.
Yet, they chose it even though there were about 16 to 18 other political parties without any legal issues. The only possible explanation is that they knew at some point that something like this would happen.” Dismissing allegation of his move to endorse President Tinubu for a second time in office, he insisted it was Atiku and his co-travellers, who came into ADC to stop him from running for the presidency in 2027 that should be held accountable for paving the way for smooth re-election of Tinubu.
APC absolves self of claims by ADC
Absolving itself of the ADC crisis, the APC through its National Publicity Secretary, Felix Morka, said INEC’s decision to remove Mark and Aregbesola from its portal is a consequence of the ADC’s “violent violation of its constitutional stipulations regarding leadership succession.”
The ruling party, welcomed INEC’s decision, saying it is in compliance with a court judgment, while declaring that it is “irresponsible for the ADC to blame the APC for it internal woes, of which they are the sole architects.” Morka said: “Quite apart from being an assembly of Nigeria’s most confused and desperate politicians, the ADC has distinguished itself as a peddler of rabid conspiracy theories about what the APC is or is not doing to undermine the party. “The ADC is a party that never was.
By design, it was a kamikaze contraption with a ‘follow-come’ self-destructive detonator. It had to unravel and is now unraveling fast by installments. “When its factional leadership under the duo of David Mark and Rauf Aregbesola parachuted into the party like thoughtless and planless commandos and hijacked the party in violent violation of its constitutional stipulations regarding leadership succession and in disregard of the rule of law, the ADC set its own date with destiny.
“INEC’s decision to de-recognise the factional David Mark-led executives in compliance with a judgement of the court is valid in law, justified in fact, and consistent with electoral policy and democratic practice. It is the consequence of the party’s reckless and desperate misadventure. “It is therefore highly escapist and irresponsible for the ADC to blame the APC for its internal woes, of which they are the sole architects.
“The ADC’s unwillingness to take responsibility for its miserable failure to follow due process, order its internal affairs, and manage its self-inflicted crisis makes ADC grossly unfit as a platform to be taken seriously by Nigerians. A party that cannot fix itself cannot possibly fix Nigeria.
Stakeholders react
As expected, INEC’s withdrawal of recognition for the ADC has sparked a chain of reactions by political stakeholders, lawyers and civil society organisations. A former Director of Voter and Publicity Education of INEC, Oluwole OsazeUzzi, who faulted the de-recognition of the Mark-led leadership of the ADC, said INEC’s position is a misreading of the Court of Appeal’s appellate directive. Osaze-Uzzi, a lawyer, said while he held the leadership of INEC in high regard, he had serious reservations about the commission’s interpretation of the appellate court order.
According to him, the commission went beyond what the law required, insisting the ADC should go ahead with its planned congresses despite its leadership dispute before the court. The former INEC director argued that the order in question was not one that stripped either side in the crisis of legitimacy, but rather one that sought to preserve the subject matter of the case pending final determination by the High Court. His words: “I think I disagree with the conclusions reached by the commission. In its extrapolation and interpretation of that order, I have reservations.
The court did not say that INEC should withdraw recognition from either faction. “What it said was that all parties should ensure they do not do anything to render nugatory the likely judgment of the court. All it did say is that both INEC and the contesting factions will be careful not to do anything that will usurp the power of the court and its ability to do justice on the matter. “I think the ADC should proceed with all that they are doing, as long as they do not impugn the majesty of the court and its ability to do justice on the case.”
Osaze-Uzzi also dismissed suggestions that any congress or convention held without the physical presence of INEC officials will automatically be invalid, stressing that the Electoral Act does not make the commission’s attendance a condition for the legality of a party’s internal exercise.
“Whether INEC attends the convention or not does not invalidate the congress and the outcome,” he said, adding that what the law requires is that the electoral commission must be notified ahead of such party activities, not necessarily that it must be present before the decisions taken can stand. “What the Electoral Act says is that you will notify INEC at least 21 days to your convention. If you do that, INEC has the power to attend by itself and validate what goes on there,” he maintained.
The ADC should proceed with all that they are doing, as long as they do not impugn the majesty of the court and its ability to do justice on the case
Human rights lawyer, Femi Falana, who also faulted INEC’s interpretation of the Court of Appeal order, criticised the electoral body’s reliance on the legal doctrine of “status quo ante bellum.” He said the term simply means a return to the situation before the dispute began. His words: “I said that INEC is wrong because the order granted by the court is an injunction of status quo ante bellum. They use such terms to deceive us.
What that means is before the start of the war, so who was in charge before that matter went to court?” Noting that the court order had been misapplied in a manner that appears to favour the ruling APC, Falana expressed concern over what he described as growing fears of a one-party state, blaming both the judiciary and senior lawyers for enabling such a perception.
“When we complain that APC is trying to turn Nigeria into a one-party state, the court and senior lawyers are to blame,” he said. Another lawyer and human rights activist, Clement Nwankwo, who also faulted INEC, said the commission’s decision to withdraw its recognition of the ADC leadership raises serious concerns.
“INEC’s de-recognition of ADC leadership under the guise of obeying a court order of ‘status quo ante bellum’ raises serious red flags. At a time when trust in the electoral process is critical, actions that suggest interference in party affairs only deepen fears of bias and democratic backsliding. “INEC must remain neutral or risk undermining itself and the credibility of the 2027 elections.
INEC needs to reverse itself on this ill-advised decision,” Nwankwo, who is the Executive Director of Policy and Legal Advocacy Centre and convener of Civil Society Situation Room, said. President and Permanent Representative, Centre for Convention on Democratic Integrity to the ECOSOC, United Nations, Olufemi Aduwo, who also spoke on the issue with New Telegraph, equally warned on the dangers of weakening the opposition ahead of the 2027 elections.
His words: “May God forbid that the APC succeeds in dismantling the fragile democracy we are still endeavouring to uphold. A party that already commands the allegiance of over 30 governors should have no need to further intimidate or suppress opposition. The recent manoeuvres suggest a deliberate strategy to weaken or outright destroy rival parties.
“The attempt to monopolise political power under the guise of governance is far more perilous than conventional terrorism, for it imperils the very framework of democratic governance. A democracy dominated by a single party ceases to be a democracy; it becomes an instrument of coercion and fear. “Those who contemplate such recklessness must recognise that the people’s resolve to protect their democratic rights far outweighs any partisan ambition.
The message is clear stability, fairness and political plurality must prevail. The leading opposition parties, ADC and Labour Party (LP), must be permitted to breathe, since the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) is dead. A chieftain of the ADC, Ladan Salihu, on his part, accused INEC of undermining the integrity of Nigeria’s political system. He also expressed strong dissatisfaction with INEC’s handling of the situation, describing it as embarrassing and scandalous.
“As a citizen, I feel extremely embarrassed. And as a politician, I feel scandalized. INEC has lowered the standard of politics and integrity in the whole issue,” he said, adding that the electoral commission is misusing legal processes to justify its actions. He, however, warned that such developments could erode public trust in democratic institutions.
“There is no way you can look at what happened with INEC and not feel sorry for Nigeria,” he said. As the propriety or otherwise of INEC’s rages, attention would been shifted to the Federal High Court, which as it stands, has been saddled with the responsibility of deciding, who leads the ADC that has assumed the strongest opposition to the ruling APC.
