Follow Us on Google
From Abel Leonard, Lafia
The political contest for the governorship ticket of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) in Nasarawa State has been thrown open again, not by a fresh political alliance or a dramatic party convention but by the absence of an election in one local government area.
A Federal High Court judgment setting aside the nomination of Major General Nuhu Angbazo (retd.) as the party’s governorship candidate has exposed the consequences of an incomplete primary and reopened a contest that the ADC appeared to have concluded ahead of the 2027 election.
The judgment, delivered on Tuesday by Justice Garba Umar of the Federal High Court, Abuja, nullified Angbazo’s nomination, restrained him from parading himself as the party’s candidate and barred the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising him in that capacity.
In Suit No. FHC/ABJ/1183/2026, between Hon. Mohammed Hassan Abdullahi, CON, as the plaintiff, and Major General Nuhu Angbazo (retd.) and two others as defendants, the matter came up before Court 5 of the Federal High Court, Abuja, for hearing of the preliminary objection and judgment.
The court dismissed the preliminary objection filed by the first and second defendants, clearing the way for the substantive matter to proceed to judgment.
More significantly, the court ordered the ADC to conduct fresh primaries in the 11 wards of Karu Local Government Area before it can validly nominate a governorship candidate for the election.
The suit was instituted by former Minister of Environment, Mohammed Hassan Abdullahi, who participated in the ADC governorship primary alongside Angbazo and Senator Mohammed Ogoshi Onawo.
The dispute centred on the exclusion of Karu from the primary process and the subsequent declaration of Angbazo as the winner despite the absence of an election in the local government.
The court held that the primary was inconclusive because voting did not take place in Karu. It consequently declined to sustain a nomination based on a process that had left out an entire local government area.
The decision has now placed the ADC before a difficult political and organisational test: how to comply with the court’s directive, manage competing interests and produce a candidate whose emergence will not be immediately overshadowed by another dispute.
A ticket reopened, a political field narrowed
The political implications of the judgment are becoming more interesting because the field of those who participated in the original primary has since changed.
Senator Mohammed Ogoshi Onawo, who was among the aspirants in the disputed exercise, has reportedly left the ADC and joined the Allied Peoples Movement (APM).
His departure means that the original contest has been altered, leaving Abdullahi as the principal challenger from that primary who remains in the party.
This development gives the fresh exercise a different political character from the one that produced Angbazo’s disputed nomination. While the court has not declared Abdullahi the winner, his continued membership of the ADC and his participation in the earlier contest place him in a significant position as the party prepares to comply with the ruling.
It is, however, important to distinguish between a political opportunity and an automatic entitlement. The judgment did not award the ticket to Abdullahi nor did it disqualify Angbazo from participating in another primary.
The court’s order was for a fresh exercise in Karu’s 11 wards, and the question of participation must be addressed within the party’s rules and the terms of the judgment.
The departure of Onawo also raises a practical question for the ADC: whether the fresh primary will be treated as a continuation of the earlier contest involving eligible aspirants or whether the party’s relevant organs will have to clarify the process and participation requirements before voting begins.
Whatever approach the party adopts, it will have to be legally defensible and transparent enough to prevent the Karu exercise from becoming another source of litigation.
Abdullahi’s camp: ‘Victory for democracy’
For Abdullahi’s camp, the judgment represents a major vindication of its decision to challenge the outcome of the earlier primary.
John Mathew, who served as Director-General of the Abdullahi campaign organisation during the primary, described the ruling as a victory for democracy and the rule of law.
Speaking with our correspondent, Mathew said the judgment had addressed the controversy surrounding the primary and demonstrated the importance of judicial independence in resolving disputes within political parties.
He said: “This is a victory for democracy. The judge has stood firm to maintain the sanity of the judiciary. We are strong and believe that this judgment has put an end to all the controversy.”
Mathew said his principal was prepared to cooperate with INEC and other relevant authorities to ensure that the fresh electoral exercise was conducted in line with the court’s directives.
He also alleged that the earlier declaration of Angbazo as the winner was fraudulent and did not reflect the wishes of party members, particularly given the exclusion of Karu from the final result.
The allegation remains the position of Abdullahi’s camp, but the court’s decision has given renewed weight to the central complaint that the primary could not validly be concluded without an election in the affected local government.
Mathew maintained that Abdullahi remained interested in the governorship contest and was ready to participate in the party’s next electoral process.
For the former minister, therefore, the judgment is not the end of the political contest but an opportunity to return to a process he believes was prematurely concluded.
Other News
While the ADC state leadership has yet to issue an official statement on the judgment, reactions from within the party suggest that the ruling may find support among members who were dissatisfied with the process that produced Angbazo.
Sources close to the party, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorised to comment publicly, said some members of the state executive committee, including the incumbent state chairman, were never comfortable with the process through which Angbazo emerged as the party’s flag bearer.
The sources indicated that the party leadership had anticipated the possibility of an unfavourable judgment and might prefer to accept the court’s decision rather than commit the organisation to another round of litigation.
Although the party has not officially confirmed this position, the reported reservations within its leadership raise a question that goes beyond the courtroom: how much internal acceptance did Angbazo’s emergence command among the party structures that would be expected to mobilise support for him?
That question becomes more significant with the intervention of Hon. Lucky Isaac Yargwa, the ADC candidate in Wamba Local Government Area, who expressed happiness over the judgment.
Yargwa said he was pleased with the court’s decision, stressing that a majority of party members were comfortable with Mohammed Hassan Abdullahi.
His position provides another indication that the disagreement over the governorship ticket may not have been confined to the aspirants who went to court. It suggests that the judgment has also become a point of political expression for party members who believe the original process did not reflect the preference of a wider section of the ADC.
However, the views expressed by Yargwa and the anonymous party sources should not be mistaken for an official resolution by the state executive committee. Until the leadership makes its position known, the possibility of an appeal or other legal response remains open.
INEC is also central to the next phase of the dispute because it was joined in the proceedings and is specifically restrained from recognising Angbazo under the nomination that has been set aside.
The Commission has yet to issue an official statement on the judgment. However, sources close to INEC indicated that it was expected to comply with the court’s decision after considering the appropriate legal and administrative steps.
The sources pointed to the Commission’s involvement in the proceedings and its presentation of evidence relating to the monitoring of the primary in the southern senatorial district, including Karu.
The issue is important because the case was built around whether an election took place in Karu and whether the party could proceed to declare a winner after excluding the local government from the final process.
INEC’s formal response is still awaited, and its precise administrative actions will depend on the judgment and the relevant court documents served on the Commission.
According to Lafia based political pundits Umaru Abdullahi who stressed that the development is particularly significant because Angbazo had featured in published reports on the field of governorship aspirants in Nasarawa ahead of the 2027 election. “The court’s ruling has now created a legal complication that the Commission and the party must address before the ADC can proceed with a valid nomination.”
The most consequential aspect of the judgment may not be the immediate political setback suffered by Angbazo, but what it reveals about the management of party primaries. He said.
A political Scientist, Shehu Armed from the state university in a statement said that a governorship primary is not merely an internal party event. It is the process through which a political organisation determines who will carry its name into a statewide election. “Its credibility therefore depends on compliance with party rules, proper documentation, transparent collation and the participation of those entitled to vote.”
He added that the exclusion of an entire local government area creates a serious question about the legitimacy of the final outcome, particularly where the affected area is subsequently found by a court to have been wrongly left out of the process.
He further clarified that in this case, the court’s intervention has exposed the risks of treating a disputed or incomplete exercise as a concluded primary. It has also demonstrated that disagreements over party nominations cannot always be resolved through internal declarations or political influence when an aggrieved aspirant chooses to seek judicial redress.
For the ADC, the challenge is now to ensure that the fresh exercise in Karu does not become another battleground. The party must clarify who is eligible to participate, communicate the process to its stakeholders and ensure that the conduct and collation of the primary are beyond avoidable controversy.
There is also a political dimension. A legal Practitioner, Raymond Umaru clarified that a party preparing to challenge established political forces in a governorship election cannot afford to enter the campaign season consumed by disagreements over its own candidate.
The reported reservations among some party executives, Abdullahi’s insistence on participating and Yargwa’s public expression of support for the judgment all point to the need for a process that enjoys broader acceptance within the organisation.
“Even if the fresh primary produces a legally valid candidate, the party will still have to address the political relationships strained by the original dispute. A court order can settle the legal status of a nomination; it cannot, by itself, rebuild trust among party members.”
However, the timing of the judgment gives the development wider significance for the 2027 governorship contest in Nasarawa.
The ADC had been positioning itself as one of the parties seeking to challenge the established political order in the state. The uncertainty surrounding its ticket now raises questions about the speed with which it can consolidate its structures and focus on campaign issues.
For Abdullahi, the ruling has reopened a political opportunity that appeared to have closed after the original primary. But he must still navigate the party’s nomination process rather than assume that the court has handed him the ticket.
For Angbazo, the nomination that gave him the status of ADC flag bearer has been set aside. His next political move will depend on the court’s orders, the party’s decisions and the applicable rules governing participation in the fresh exercise.
Onawo’s movement to the APM has meanwhile changed the configuration of the original contest, while Yargwa’s reaction suggests that the outcome of the legal battle may resonate beyond the camps of the former aspirants.
The ADC leadership faces perhaps the most delicate task. It must decide whether to challenge the judgment or proceed with the fresh primary, while ensuring that neither option deepens the divisions that have accompanied the nomination dispute.
Ultimately, the missing election in Karu has become much more than a procedural issue. It has exposed weaknesses in the party’s nomination process, altered the political calculations of its aspirants and placed the credibility of its internal democracy under scrutiny.
The next test for the ADC will not simply be whether it can conduct another primary in 11 wards. It will be whether it can turn the court-ordered exercise into a credible process that its members can accept and its eventual candidate can confidently take into the 2027 governorship contest.
