2027: Ripples as Appeal Court bars INEC from recognising Mark-led ADC congresses

…We won’t lose sleep, says Atiku, rallies ADC supporters, insists primaries valid

The Court of Appeal in Abuja, on Monday, upheld the judgment restraining the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising state congresses organised by committees appointed by the David Mark-led caretaker leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

A three-member panel of the appellate court, in a judgment delivered by Justice Okon Abang, said it found no reason to set aside the restraining order the Federal High Court in Abuja had issued against the Mark-led ADC on April 29.

It further upheld the order of Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, which restrained the Mark-led executives from interfering with the tenure and functions of the party’s elected state executives.

The court concurred that responsibility for conducting state congresses of political parties rests with elected state executive committees, not with the national leadership.

Justices Abang and Donatus Okorowo gave the majority verdict barring the electoral body from acknowledging the outcome of congresses held by the Mark-led leadership of the ADC.

The  head of the appellate court’s panel, Justice Abba Mohammed, gave a dissenting judgment.

In his minority decision, Justice Mohammed held that the case that precipitated the restraining order bordered on a non-justiciable internal affair of a political party.

He held that the trial court was wrong to have assumed jurisdiction to entertain the matter.

This judgment may jeopardise the presidential candidacies of former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and other candidates who emerged through the national congress organised by the Mark-led faction of the ADC, ahead of the 2027 general elections.

The high court had, in its judgment, held that the four-year tenure of the ADC’s State Working Committees and State Executive Committees remained valid and subsisting, pending the conduct of properly constituted congresses and the convocation of a national convention.

The judgment followed a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/581/2026, lodged before the court by aggrieved members of the ADC.

The suit was filed by Don Obinna, Johnny Derek, Obah C. Ehigiator, Olona Yinka, Dr Charles Omideji, Samuel  Gyang, and Obianyo Patrick, on behalf of all State Chairmen and State Executive Committees of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

Listed as defendants are the ADC; Sen. Mark; Sen. Patricia Akwashiki,  Bolaji Abdullahi; Rauf Aregbesola; and Prof. Oserheimen Osunbor and INEC.

The plaintiffs challenged the decision of the Sen. Mark-led leadership of the ADC to constitute committees for the purpose of conducting state congresses.

They challenged the validity of appointments made by the Mark-led caretaker committee.

They argued that planned state congresses slated for April 2026, if conducted under the supervision of the said caretaker committee, would constitute a gross violation of the party’s constitution.

It was further the position of the plaintiffs that only duly elected party organs recognised under the party’s constitution possess the power to conduct congresses.

The appellate court, while upholding the restraining order, said it had a duty to intervene so as to “prevent anarchy and ensure the survival of democracy in Nigeria.”

It cited a recent Supreme Court judgment in the leadership crisis rocking the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to hold that the ADC case could not be classified as a domestic affair of a political party.

“Once a complaint before the court is anchored on a constitutional infraction, the shield of internal affairs drops and the veil is lifted for judicial intervention,” Justice Abang added in the majority judgment.

The panel consequently, dismissed the appeal marked CA/ABJ/CV/608/2026, which the ADC lodged in order to set aside the high court judgment.

NAN reports that Justice Abdulmalik on April 29 held that neither the 1999 Constitution, as amended, nor the Constitution of the ADC empowered the caretaker/interim National Working Committee led by Mark to appoint committees for the purpose of conducting state congresses.

She held that the claims brought before it by the plaintiffs were valid and deserving of judicial consideration, citing alleged breach of constitutional and statutory provisions.

The judge also held that Section 223 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, mandates political parties to conduct periodic elections based on democratic principles.

The court added that Article 23 of the ADC Constitution also provides that national and state officers shall hold office for a maximum of two terms spanning eight years.

Justice Abdulmalik had stressed that although courts are generally reluctant to interfere in the domestic affairs of political parties, they nonetheless intervene where there is a clear allegation of violation of constitutional or statutory provisions.

Meanwhile, former Vice President and presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress, Atiku Abubakar, has dismissed claims that the Court of Appeal judgment on the party’s leadership crisis had invalidated the ADC’s primary elections for the 2027 general election, insisting that the ruling was limited to the conduct of the party’s congresses and the tenure of its state executives.

Reacting to the appellate court’s judgment on Monday, Atiku said attempts to portray the decision as the collapse of the ADC’s presidential ticket amounted to political propaganda designed to mislead Nigerians and weaken the opposition.

In a statement issued by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, the former vice president urged party members and supporters to remain calm, assuring them that the judgment did not affect candidates who emerged through the party’s direct primaries.

“Those celebrating today should celebrate with caution. Those attempting to sell false hope to their supporters should remember that political propaganda can never substitute for judicial pronouncements.

“The judgment being celebrated relates to the conduct of state congresses and the tenure of State Executive Committees. It does not, from the facts available, amount to a judicial nullification of the ADC’s primary elections conducted under the Electoral Act”, the statement said.

He argued that there was a clear legal distinction between the election of party executives through internal congresses and the nomination of candidates through statutory primary elections.

“There is a world of legal difference between the election of party executives through internal congresses and the nomination of candidates through statutory primary elections. They are distinct legal exercises, governed by different legal principles and serving different constitutional purposes. One should not be confused with the other,” he added.

The ADC chieftain further maintained that courts are bound to determine only issues placed before them.

“It is a settled principle of law that courts determine only the issues submitted before them. They neither manufacture disputes nor pronounce on matters that were never placed before them. Any attempt to stretch this judgment beyond its proper scope is an invitation to legal absurdity,” he stated.

Atiku also criticised what he described as attempts to misrepresent the judgment on social media.

 “Our opponents appear more eager to write judgments on social media than to read the one delivered by the Court of Appeal. Nigeria is governed by the rule of law, not by headlines, hashtags or the fantasies of political opportunists,” he added.

The statement disclosed that the ADC had already directed its legal team to approach the Supreme Court to challenge the appellate court’s decision.

“We remain respectful of the judiciary and have already instructed our legal team to approach the Supreme Court for a definitive determination of the issues arising from the judgment. That is the proper constitutional path, and we have absolute confidence in the judicial process,” Atiku said.

He urged party faithful not to be discouraged by the setback.

 “Let no supporter of the ADC lose sleep. Let no Nigerian who believes in the restoration of our country be discouraged. The struggle to rescue Nigeria has never been about one courtroom or one judgment. It is a movement born out of the collective desire of millions of Nigerians for competent leadership, economic recovery, national unity and the restoration of hope,” he said.

The Court of Appeal, in split decision of two to one in Abuja on Monday, upheld the judgment of the Federal High Court restraining the Independent National Electoral Commission from recognising or participating in state congresses organised by committees appointed by the Senator David Mark-led caretaker leadership of the ADC.

The majority judgment, delivered by Justice Okon Abang and supported by Justice Donatus Okorowo, held that the dispute involved constitutional questions and was therefore not shielded by the doctrine of internal party affairs. However, the presiding Justice, Abba Mohammed, dissented, holding that the matter was an internal party dispute that ought not to have been entertained by the Federal High Court.

Following the judgment, the ADC announced that it would appeal to the Supreme Court, maintaining that the decision had no effect on candidates who emerged through the party’s primary elections for the 2027 polls.

Reaffirming that position, Atiku said the party remained focused on the 2027 general election.

“The road to 2027 remains open, and the resolve of the Nigerian people cannot be overturned by propaganda. Our destination remains unchanged, and by the grace of God and the will of the Nigerian people, we shall arrive,” he added.