Between ADC, INEC And Rule Of Law
By Thomas Akor
Since the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) suspended recognition of all leadership factions in the African Democratic Congress (ADC) following a ruling by the Court of Appeal and ongoing litigation over the party’s leadership, the polity has been on edge. That is understandable given the status of the party as an emerging opposition platform. In a statement by its spokesperson, Mohammed Haruna, the electoral commission hinged its decision on an order by the Court of Appeal. In obedience to the court order, the commission decided to stop engaging with any of the two warring factions until there is a substantive court judgement after it received conflicting letters demanding recognition from both sides. Pointedly, the judgement did not favour the faction led by David Mark, prompting INEC to decline recognition of his chairmanship.
The point, then, is that the court ruling of the Appeal Court undermines the legitimacy of David Mark’s leadership, and INEC’s position reinforces the legal effect of the judgement, effectively limiting his authority in dealing with the electoral body. To say that the decision places the party in a contested leadership situation, pending possible appeals or internal resolution, is to put it very mildly. Not just ahead of the 2027 general election but in politics generally, it is a no-brainer that internal divisions impair coordinated campaign efforts across states. If the ADC refuses to put its house in order, it risks disintegration and utter irrelevance, both in the build up to the election and thereafter. Disputes over legitimate party leadership will inevitably lead to conflicting candidate lists, risking disqualification or exclusion from ballots. Besides, the party’s ability to form alliances or coalitions ahead of elections will be significantly diminished. If the party continues to present a picture of instability, voters will simply look the other way. The question they would be asking themselves is how a party that cannot properly organise, harmonise and manage its internal issues can hope to govern Nigeria effectively. The inescapable conclusion, given ADC’s antics so far, is that it is not prepared for the 2027 polls but is only interested in bickering and wrangling, intent on leading Nigerians, particularly undecided or swing voters, down a slippery slope.
If unresolved before key electoral deadlines, the ADC risks reduced participation or irrelevance in the forthcoming elections. The party is likely to experience operational disruptions unless a legally recognized leadership emerges quickly. Its performance may decline significantly in comparison to more stable parties, unless the crisis is resolved and unity restored. The best-Case Scenario would be for swift judicial clarification or internal reconciliation restores leadership legitimacy and stabilizes party operations, while the worst-case scenario would be prolonged litigation and factional conflict result in parallel structures, disqualification risks, and electoral underperformance.
The court ruling and INEC’s response represent a critical inflection point for the African Democratic Congress. Without rapid resolution, the party faces a high-risk trajectory that could significantly undermine its competitiveness in the forthcoming elections.
The genesis of the current crisis plaguing the party is the decision by a member of the National Working Committee (NWC) of the party to drag its factional chairman, Senator David Mark to the Federal High Court, seeking an ex parte order. The judge didn’t grant it outright. Instead, he asked Mark to come and show cause why the request shouldn’t be approved. Rather than argue his case at that court, the former Senate President proceeded to the Court of Appeal. The appellate court was clear: go back to the Federal High Court and argue your case. More importantly, the Court of Appeal cautioned INEC not to take any action that could render the pending suit useless. In simple terms “dont recognize anybody”. Not Mark. Not Nafiu. No faction.
Until the court settles the leadership tussle, there is officially no recognized leadership. INEC didn’t pick sides; it simply obeyed the court. However, in their typical manner, members of the party have been clutching at straws, accusing the electoral body of bias when the real bias and lack of objectivity lies within their own ranks. Rather than going through the legal process dictated by the laws of the land, they have been scheduling press conferences, issuing acerbic statements, and attempting to reap political capital from their own self-inflicted wounds. This move is, for want of a better position, patently illogical. To the extent that INEC’s action is in tandem with the orders of court, to that extent is its position grouned in law, logic and democratic ethos. There is no basis for an alternative conclusion at the moment.
Thomas Akor a public analyst sent this piece from Gboko, Benue State
