ADC and INEC’s shocker
There is no doubt about it. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) was tardy in its reaction to the Court of Appeal verdict on the leadership crisis rocking the African
- By Lawal Ogienagbon
There is no doubt about it. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) was tardy in its reaction to the Court of Appeal verdict on the leadership crisis rocking the African Democratic Congress (ADC). On March 12, the court dismissed the appeal by David Mark and Rauf Aregbesola against a suit brought against them at the Federal High Court, Abuja, as chairman and secretary of ADC. The duo became ADC’s leaders following a coalition spearheaded by former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and former Anambra State Governor Peter Obi, among others.
But the arrangement was not seamless. Cracks appeared after a faction of the Ralph Nwosu-led original ADC national working committee (NWC) handed over to Mark and co. Nwosu’s deputy, Nafiu Bala Gombe, denied resigning alongside others, and insisted on becoming the party’s chairman. He consequently went to court, praying that INEC be restrained from recognising Mark and Aregbesola as ADC’s new leaders.
Justice Emeka Nwite refused Gombe’s request for an interim injunction and directed that the defendants be served with the court processes in order to show reason why the relief sought should not be granted. The defendants are Mark, Aregbesola, Nwosu, ADC and INEC. Dissatisfied with the ruling, Mark and Aregbesola appealed. They claimed that the high court could no longer hear the case after it had rejected Gombe’s request for interim injunction. The appeal court described the claim as false. A three-person panel of Justices unanimously held that the defendants’ claim was not a reflection of the high court ruling.
The court declared that the appeal was incompetent and invalid as it was filed without first obtaining the leave of the high or appeal court as should be the case in an interlocutory matter. Justice Uchechukwu Onyemenam, who read the lead judgment, said the appellants were wrong in their reading of the ruling since all Justice Nwite did was to direct that they be put on notice. He did not grant any injunction.
“The directive in the ruling was an interlocutory exercise of the judge’s discretionary power to regulate proceedings in his court… A careful examination of the ruling showed that the trial court did not determine the exparte application”, the appeal court held.
The Justices ordered the speedy hearing of the substantive matter by the high court and also directed the parties to maintain the status quo ante bellum (the state in which things were before the crisis) to preserve the subject-matter of the dispute, pending the resolution.
This happened 23 days ago. The appeal court verdict is clear and straightforward, pundits said yesterday, wondering why it took INEC this long to act on such an explicit decision. What legal opinion was it seeking that caused this tardiness? Unsurprisingly, the commission’s decision on Wednesday to derecognise Mark, Aregbesola and other NWC members of the coalition ADC has set tongues wagging.
Among those talking are the affected ADC stalwarts and lawyers. Without explaining why it delayed its decision, which was made public 21 days after the appeal court verdict, INEC said it had resolved to comply with the decision to maintain the status quo ante bellum to preserve the res (subject-matter) of the dispute, before September 2, 2025 when Gombe went to court. Accordingly, its National Commissioner and Chairman, Information and Voter Education Committee, Mallam Mohammed Haruna, said INEC would refrain from taking any step capable of foisting a fait accompli on the court or rendering nugatory the proceedings.
Read Also: Tinubu directs deployment of 5,000 AI-enabled cameras in Plateau
In a statement in Abuja, Haruna said: “The commission refused to accede to the request of the plaintiff’s solicitors to allow him Gombe to take over the affairs of ADC, pending the determination of the case. The commission shall not, given the reliefs claimed in the originating summons and the pending motions, receive any further communication or deal with any of the parties or groups pertaining to the affairs of the party and will not monitor any meeting, congress or convention convened on behalf of ADC by any group until the matter is decided by the Federal High Court, Abuja, so as not to do any act capable of foisting a fait accompli on the court or otherwise rendering nugatory the proceedings before the trial court.
“Since the names of the current NWC members led by Senator David Mark were uploaded on 9th September, 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”.
Restating its pledge to be neutral and impartial as well as comply strictly with court orders to ensure the sanctity of the electoral process, INEC urged parties and stakeholders to refrain from any act capable of jeopardising the 2027 election time table.
Blasting INEC over its decision, ADC accused the commission of wrongly interpreting the appeal court verdict. “We knew that INEC was being pressured by a government that has become jittery from ADC’s rising momentum even in the face of its relentless assault on all opposition parties. INEC’s press statement is full of contradictions that fly in the face of facts and reason… What is clear, however, is that INEC has caved in to pressure and has chosen to side with the government against the Nigerian people”. ADC claimed that Gombe, contrary to his denial, wrote a letter dated 18 May, 2025 resigning as a member ADC NWC with effect from 26 May, 2025.
A law professor, Chidi Odinkalu, said it was not INEC’s business to interpret the appeal court decision. He said if INEC had doubts about the verdict, it should have gone back to the court to seek clarification. Another lawyer Inibehe Effiong said the issues surrounding ADC raised concerns about a “well-orchestrated sinister conspiracy to truncate a transparent and electoral process.”
He said there was no basis for INEC’s action since available information indicated that ADC’s executive resigned to pave the way for the new leadership of Mark and Aregbesola, adding that party leadership disputes are regarded generally as internal affairs. He asked for clarification on the order that the status quo ante bellum be maintained, wondering whether it implied a leadership vacuum within the party until the case is resolved. INEC has said the maintenance of the status quo ante bellum would precede the filing of Gombe’s suit on September 2, 2025. Consequently, it derecognised the Mark-led NWC, which came into being on September 9 of the same year.
It is instructive to note that INEC has been consistent in dealing with parties in accordance with judicial pronouncements. It registered the Democratic Leadership Alliance (DLA) and Nigeria Democratic Party (NDP) following court orders. It also granted access to the Grassroots Initiative Party (GRIP) to complete registration as a party based on court order. After a long drawn battle, the court in January resolved the Labour Party (LP) leadership feud in favour of a former minister, Dr Esther Nenadi-Usman, and INEC recognised her, and derecognised Julius Abure, who it had hitherto related with in that capacity.
Also based on court order, INEC recognised the Wike and Sam Anyanwu-led Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), which just held its convention in Abuja, where Anyanwu retained his position as national secretary.
The Supreme Court has since described the issue of “leadership and membership” as internal affairs of a party which the courts cannot adjudicate upon as long as due process is followed. According to the apex court in the appeal of Sam Anyanwu versus Sunday Ude-Okoye, PDP and others, “matters relating to leadership or membership of a party fall strictly within the party’s internal affairs and should not be the court’s business”
It, however, held that courts could interfere only where (a) the court is constitutionally empowered to do so; (b) a crime has been committed, and (c) there is a violation of constitutional rights.
In its decision on the PDP dispute, the appeal court upheld these principles in sacking the NWC that was elected by the then Makinde-led faction of the party in Ibadan in November, 2025. Justice Onyemenam in the unanimous judgment of the three-member panel held, among others, that it was wrong of the bloc to have held the convention in breach of two court orders, and also to have stopped former Jigawa State Governor Sule Lamido from running for chairman.
The court held: “The denial of Lamido the opportunity to exercise his right by purchasing nomination form for the position of national chairman cannot be an internal affair of PDP; internal affairs are not absolute. Where a party deliberately breached the 1999 Constitution (as amended), Electoral Act 2022 (as amended) and its own constitution and guidelines, has gone beyond any internal affairs that courts cannot adjudicate upon. The court must by law intervene and resolve the matter in line with the position of the law”.
According to pundits, ADC’s crisis appears to be similar to PDP’s. One of them raised some posers in a chat with our reporter last night. He asked: Was the party’s constitution and guidelines followed before the original party dissolved into the coalition ADC? How was the old NWC dissolved? Ralph Nwosu and some others were said to have resigned? Is there any proof of their resignations? How do we reconcile that with the claim of Gombe, the deputy national chairman, that he did not resign?
Gombe insists that by virtue of ADC’s constitution, he should take over as chairman following Nwosu’s resignation. This is the crux of the matter: alleged breach of the party’s constitution. Should the courts overlook that because some powerful politicians are involved? A political party is bound by its own rules and if the rules are violated the party bears the brunt. It is a pit that some lawyers do not see it this way and are misleading the public with legal mumbo jumbo.
INEC’s interpretation is spot on: neither Gombe nor Mark is recognised as ADC chairman. But it should have acted swiftly after the March 12 appeal court verdict.
