The opposition African Democratic Congress (ADC) has restated its determination to hold its nationwide congresses and national convention scheduled for April 14, even as tensions rise over warnings issued by the electoral authorities.
At the centre of the controversy is a growing internal leadership dispute within the party, which has already attracted the attention of the electoral regulator, the Independent National Electoral Commission.
The situation has placed the party in a delicate position, with questions surrounding legitimacy, compliance, and judicial interpretation of its internal processes.
The ADC leadership insists that all necessary steps have been taken in line with constitutional provisions governing party activities.
According to the party’s National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, the party duly informed the electoral commission within the required 21-day notice period ahead of its planned political exercises.
He added that acknowledgement of receipt was issued, reinforcing the party’s belief that due process had been followed.
Despite this, the commission has maintained a cautious stance.
The electoral body recently suspended recognition of the party’s current National Executive Committee led by former Senate President David Mark, citing an unresolved court case concerning the party’s leadership structure.
This move has intensified uncertainty within the party and raised broader questions about who has the legal authority to convene and supervise its internal affairs.
The issue has also drawn strong commentary from officials of the electoral body.
The chairman of the commission, Joash Amupitan, warned that proceeding with political activities under disputed legal conditions could lead to serious consequences.
He stressed that the commission must act within the boundaries of the law and avoid any action that could later be invalidated by the courts.
According to him, past electoral experiences in states such as Zamfara and Plateau demonstrate the risks of ignoring judicial rulings or procedural requirements.
In those cases, court decisions altered election outcomes, sometimes disqualifying winners and declaring runners-up as rightful victors.
These precedents, he argued, highlight why strict adherence to legal processes is essential.
The commission’s position is rooted in concerns about maintaining electoral credibility and preventing a recurrence of scenarios where court judgments overturn democratic outcomes.
In explaining its stance, the electoral body emphasized that it would not supervise or recognize activities conducted under leadership structures currently being challenged in court.
This has effectively left the party’s planned convention in a state of legal uncertainty.
Nevertheless, the ADC has taken a firm position, stating that internal party democracy must continue regardless of external disputes.
Party officials argue that political organizations have constitutional autonomy to organize their internal affairs, and that halting planned activities would undermine democratic participation within the party.
The spokesperson, Bolaji Abdullahi, reiterated that the party would proceed with preparations whether or not the electoral commission agrees to monitor the process.
He maintained that the notice requirement had already been fulfilled and that no procedural breach had occurred that would justify suspension of the convention.
However, the stance of the electoral body continues to cast a shadow over the exercise.
The leadership dispute involving David Mark remains unresolved in court, and until a final judicial determination is made, the legitimacy of any executive decisions taken by the party may be questioned.
As the April 14 date approaches, stakeholders are closely watching how both sides will navigate the standoff.
Legal analysts suggest that any decision to proceed without full regulatory recognition could expose the party to further litigation or invalidate outcomes arising from the convention.
For now, the situation highlights a broader tension between party autonomy and regulatory oversight in Nigeria’s political system.
With the electoral body insisting on strict compliance with legal processes and the ADC determined to proceed with its schedule, the dispute underscores the fragile balance that often exists between internal party democracy and institutional regulation.
Notably, INEC remains central to the unfolding developments, as its decisions are likely to determine whether the planned convention proceeds smoothly or becomes entangled in further legal challenges.
About The Author
