INEC will examine a court ruling that invalidated the ADC leadership structure, raising fresh uncertainty over Atiku Abubakar’s 2027 presidential candidacy.
The political future of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) ahead of the 2027 general elections has been thrown into fresh uncertainty following a Federal High Court judgment that invalidated the party’s current leadership structure and several decisions taken under it.
The ruling has raised questions about the validity of the party’s presidential primary, which produced former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar as its candidate for the next presidential election, as well as the status of other candidates nominated under the disputed leadership.
Against this background, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has announced plans to examine the legal implications of the judgment at its meeting next week before deciding what steps to take.
The electoral body is, however, refusing to make an immediate declaration on the controversy, insisting that it must obtain and carefully study the Certified True Copy (CTC) of the court’s decision.
INEC’s position was explained on Sunday by its National Commissioner and Chairman of the Information and Voter Education Committee, Mohammed Haruna.
Haruna said the commission would not depend on newspaper publications, broadcast reports or public interpretations to determine the legal meaning of the judgment.
He maintained that the actual court document was necessary to establish the specific orders issued by the judge and their implications for the party and the electoral commission.
According to him, INEC would rather examine the certified judgment than make a premature decision based on information that might not accurately represent what the court decided.
He also confirmed that the matter would be considered when the commission’s members convene next week.
Haruna further addressed the possibility of the affected ADC leadership challenging the judgment at a higher court, noting that INEC would respect any valid judicial order that might subsequently be issued.
He explained that if the faction led by former Senate President David Mark files an appeal and successfully obtains an injunction staying the execution of the judgment, the commission would be expected to comply with that directive.
His comments indicate that INEC is leaving room for further legal proceedings before settling its position on the leadership dispute.
How the leadership dispute reached court
The controversy originated from disagreements over the leadership transition within the ADC following the departure of its former National Chairman, Ralph Nwosu.
Nafiu Bala Gombe, who previously served as the party’s Deputy National Chairman for the North-East, challenged the process that brought Mark and other individuals into the caretaker committee responsible for managing the party’s affairs.
Gombe argued that the party’s constitutional provisions entitled him to assume leadership following Nwosu’s resignation.
He maintained that the arrangement which eventually placed Mark at the head of the party did not follow the procedures established by the ADC constitution.
Dissatisfied with the development, he approached the Federal High Court in Abuja to challenge the legitimacy of the caretaker committee and the decisions subsequently taken by its members.
The case, identified as FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, also sought to prevent Mark and former Minister of Interior, Rauf Aregbesola, from continuing to identify themselves as the party’s National Chairman and National Secretary, respectively.
Gombe questioned the authority under which the disputed officials were operating and asked the court to invalidate actions carried out by the leadership arrangement.
Court nullifies caretaker committee’s emergence
Delivering judgment on Thursday, Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court, Abuja, ruled against the process through which the Mark-led caretaker committee emerged.
The court found that the arrangement violated provisions of the ADC constitution, relevant sections of the Electoral Act and the 1999 Constitution.
The consequences of the decision extended beyond the leadership positions being contested, as the judge also invalidated several political and administrative decisions taken under the disputed arrangement.
One of the most consequential aspects of the judgment concerned the ADC presidential primary that produced Atiku as the party’s flag bearer for the 2027 general elections.
The court nullified the process, creating uncertainty over the recognition and validity of the former vice-president’s emergence as the party’s presidential candidate.
The decision also affected Aregbesola’s emergence as National Secretary, the appointment of other national officers and the nomination of candidates presented by the ADC for the forthcoming elections.
Additionally, INEC was directed not to recognise or act on resolutions reached at the party’s 99th National Executive Committee meeting held on July 27, 2025.
The ADC, INEC, Mark, Aregbesola and Nwosu were listed as defendants in the legal action.
INEC’s next move could shape ADC’s preparations
The commission’s forthcoming meeting is expected to be an important step in determining how it responds to the judgment within the framework of electoral laws and existing court directives.
For the ADC, the dispute comes at a critical period when political parties are expected to organise their internal structures, settle leadership questions and prepare for the 2027 electoral contest.
The uncertainty surrounding its leadership could also affect the party’s ability to move forward with its electoral preparations, particularly if the decisions already taken under the invalidated arrangement cannot be recognised.
Atiku’s political position has also become a major issue in the unfolding situation because his emergence as the party’s presidential candidate was among the decisions affected by the judgment.
However, INEC has not announced any final decision on his candidacy or the recognition of any faction within the party.
The possibility of an appeal introduces another dimension to the dispute, as any fresh order from an appellate court could influence how the judgment is implemented.
For now, the electoral commission appears determined to avoid taking sides until it has examined the complete court decision and considered the legal options available.
The outcome of its deliberations next week could provide further clarity on the ADC’s recognition by INEC, the status of its leadership and the implications for candidates preparing to contest under the party’s platform in 2027.
Until then, the leadership controversy remains unresolved, with the party’s political direction and electoral arrangements hanging on the next developments in the courtroom and INEC’s eventual response.
About The Author
