INEC Awaits Certified Court Copy Before Acting on ADC Leadership Dispute

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) said on Thursday that it will not take any formal step on the leadership crisis gripping the African Democratic Congress (ADC) until it receives and examines the certified true copy of the Federal High Court judgment that nullified the party’s caretaker committee headed by former Senate President David Mark.

The court’s decision, delivered in Abuja, struck down the Mark‑led caretaker committee and also reversed the emergence of former Vice‑President Atiku Abubakar as the ADC’s presidential flag‑bearer for the 2027 general elections. INEC’s National Commissioner and chairman of the Information and Voter Education Committee, Mohammed Haruna, told Sunday Punch that the commission’s immediate priority is to secure the official copy of the judgment before it can act.

Advertisement

Haruna emphasized that the commission cannot rely on media reports alone. “We can’t take a position until we see the judgement ourselves. We have to get the certified true copy because we don’t take decisions or reports of what the court said based on reports because the reports could be wrong,” he said. He added that the matter will be placed on the agenda for the commission’s meeting scheduled for next week, where members will deliberate on the appropriate response.

The cautious stance reflects INEC’s statutory duty to ensure that any party recognition, candidate registration or filing conforms to the legal framework that governs elections in Nigeria. The commission’s role includes verifying that parties meet the requirements of the Electoral Act and the Constitution before they can field candidates. By waiting for the authenticated judgment, INEC aims to avoid a situation where it acts on an incomplete or inaccurate understanding of the court’s orders.

Justice Peter Lifu authored the judgment that declared the emergence of the Mark‑led caretaker committee contrary to the ADC constitution, the Electoral Act and the 1999 Constitution. The ruling arose from a lawsuit filed by former ADC Deputy National Chairman (North‑East) Nafiu Bala Gombe, identified as case FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025. Gombe argued that after the resignation of former National Chairman Ralph Nwosu, he was constitutionally entitled to assume party leadership.

In his suit, Gombe sought to invalidate the actions of the caretaker committee and to restrain both David Mark and former Minister of Interior Rauf Aregbesola from presenting themselves as National Chairman and National Secretary respectively. The court upheld Gombe’s claim, nullifying the process through which the caretaker committee emerged and overturning the ADC’s 99th National Executive Committee meeting held on 27 July 2025.

As a result, the judgment also voided the primary that produced Atiku Abubakar as the ADC’s 2027 presidential candidate, and it cancelled the appointments of Aregbesola and other national officers. The court ordered INEC not to recognise or act on any decisions taken at that meeting, effectively resetting the party’s internal structure and candidate slate for the upcoming elections. The directive places the onus on the electoral body to refrain from processing any ADC filings that stem from the now‑voided proceedings.

Haruna indicated that INEC will comply with any further court orders, including those that may arise from an appeal by the Mark‑led faction. “Obviously, if the David Mark faction should appeal, which I am sure they will, and they get an injunction for stay of execution, obviously, we’ll have to obey that judgement,” he said. This statement shows the commission’s willingness to follow judicial directives, even as the political battle within the ADC continues.

The prospect of an appeal adds another layer of uncertainty. Should the Mark faction obtain a stay of execution, INEC would be obliged to pause any enforcement of the current nullification until the appellate court issues its ruling. Conversely, if the appeal is dismissed, the present judgment would remain the governing authority on the party’s leadership and candidate arrangements.

The ADC’s internal dispute and the ensuing legal battle have broader implications for Nigeria’s electoral landscape. Political parties seeking to field candidates must adhere strictly to constitutional and electoral statutes, and any deviation can trigger court intervention that ripples through voter registration and candidate accreditation processes. The episode show how party governance issues can quickly become matters of national importance, given the role of INEC in safeguarding the integrity of elections.

For ordinary Nigerians, the outcome of this dispute matters because the ADC is one of the parties that consistently contests national elections and, if cleared, could influence the composition of the presidential ballot in 2027. A prolonged leadership vacuum or repeated court battles risk confusing voters and could affect the party’s ability to campaign effectively. Moreover, the legal clarity provided by the courts helps ensure that all parties compete on an even playing field, preventing unilateral decisions that might disadvantage some candidates.

As INEC prepares for its upcoming meeting, party officials, prospective candidates and the electorate are watching closely for the commission’s next move. The next step will be determined by the receipt of the certified true copy of Justice Lifu’s judgment. Once the document is in hand, the commission is expected to deliberate on whether to acknowledge a new leadership configuration for the ADC or to maintain the status quo dictated by the court’s ruling.

The commission’s eventual decision will shape the procedural pathway for the ADC’s participation in the 2027 polls, and it will also set a precedent for how similar intra‑party disputes are handled in the future. Until the certified judgment is reviewed and the commission’s meeting concludes, INEC remains on standby, ready to act in accordance with the law.