Follow Us on Google
From Romanus Ugwu, Abuja
The build-up to the 2027 general election, particularly the presidential poll, may have faced its first major litmus test last week when the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) wielded the big stick in its pronouncement on the status of the national leadership of the opposition coalition party, the African Democratic Congress (ADC).
Ever since the proclamation, which many Nigerians interpreted and misinterpreted as politically motivated, there have been an endless barrage of attacks and criticisms hurled at the electoral umpire for attempting to truncate democracy in the country.
Expectedly, torrents of verbal abuse and commendations have continued to pour in for the INEC chairman, Prof. Joash Ojo Amupitan, for allegedly prosecuting the script written by the presidency and the ruling party, the All Progressives Congress (APC), towards ensuring the destabilisation of the opposition coalition party, considered as the most viable competitor ahead of 2027.
From all indications, beyond the attacks and the upsurge in sentiments, the thesis and antithesis of the arguments on the decision, it seems that the ADC, the supposed darling party of most angry Nigerians, may have, preliminarily, committed a devastating legal gaffe.
The alleged legal goof, according to many political watchers, could scuttle their hitherto strong electoral chances and anticipated edge in next year’s general election by playing into the hands of the enemy forces.
At the centre of the confusion and litigations, Daily Sun can report, was the legal determination of the status of erstwhile Deputy National Chairman of the party, Nafiu Bala Gombe, who, despite allegedly resigning his position in the letter circulating online, was allegedly pressured to take legal action to test the authenticity of the David Mark-led NWC.
By way of explaining further the circumstances that culminated in what many legal luminaries considered as ADC’s legal blunder and faux pas to a layman’s understanding, the David Mark-led coalition NWC’s present predicament could be attributed to the twin issues of the untidy manner in which they ‘hijacked’ the Ralph Okey Nwosu-led leadership of the party and, secondly, the fundamental legal mistake of going to the Court of Appeal over the ongoing internal leadership dispute at a trial court.
Explaining the controversy further, the National Secretary of APC, Senator Surajudeen Ajibola Basiru, noted that, “the appellate court had found that the lower court had not granted the injunctive relief sought but merely asked the defendants to show cause why the orders sought should not be granted, implying that Senator David Mark’s faction appeal was built on a faulty premise.
“Worse still, the key issue of jurisdiction was still pending at the trial court, making the appeal premature, and they failed to obtain the required leave for an interlocutory appeal, an error serious enough to render the entire case incompetent.
“The appeal was therefore completely dismissed with the court ordering all parties to maintain the status quo and avoid any action that could disrupt the ongoing case, effectively portraying ADC as acting hastily, procedurally flawed, and in disregard of due legal process,” he explained.
Elucidating more on the incident, Senator Basiru said: “For the avoidance of doubts, in dismissing an appeal filed by David Mark, the Court of Appeal ordered thus: That Suit No. FCT/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, be and is hereby granted an accelerated hearing in view of the electoral timetable released by the 4th respondent.
“That the parties are hereby directed to maintain the status quo ante bellum and shall refrain from taking any step or doing any act capable of foisting a fait accompli on the court or otherwise rendering nugatory the proceedings before the trial court. Costs of N2 million are awarded in favour of the 1st respondent.
“It is the above orders of the court that is being put into effect by INEC, and we are at a loss the basis for the allegation and outright fallacious and malicious propaganda that President Tinubu is weakening opposition in the circumstance,” he queried, during a world press conference last week.
However, despite his explanations, the angry Nigerians that responded in their bombardments ever since the pronouncement was made, have not stopped hauling abuses at Prof Amupitan.
The leaders and chieftains of the coalition party too, have taken turns to condemn the decision in totality and in the strongest terms, calling for Prof Amupitan’s immediate sack and the resignation of his National Commissioners.
But, reeling out the legal proceedings that necessitated its action, the commission, in a statement by Mohammed Kudu Haruna, the National Commissioner, and Chairman, Information and Voter Education Committee, resolved that the leadership of the coalition party was guilty as charged and the architect of its misfortune.
“Given the scenario, the commission resolved as follows: to maintain the status quo ante bellum as directed by the Court of Appeal based on the facts and position of the parties existing before September 2, 2025, when the case was filed by the plaintiff.
“That the commission would, in accordance with the Order of the Court of Appeal in Appeal No CA/ABJ/145/2026, refrain from taking any step or doing any act capable of foisting a fait accompli on the court or otherwise rendering nugatory the proceedings before the trial court, having regard to all the processes filed before the trial Court.
“The commission refused to accede to the request of the Plaintiff’s Solicitors to allow Hon. Nafiu Bala 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 about the affairs of the party and will not monitor any meeting, congress or convention convened on behalf of the ADC by any group until the matter is decided by the Federal High Court, Abuja.
“Since the names of the current NWC members led by Senator Mark were uploaded September 9, 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,” the commission said.
And to further underscore the veracity and gravity of the decision, considered by many pundits as a threat to democracy, the gladiators had taken time to bombard the media in their desperate attempt to justify and condemn the development.
While responding to the development, David Mark specifically painted Prof Amupitan in all manners of derogatory inscriptions, describing him as “a stooge, a puppet of the presidency, and grossly incompetent to occupy the position,” let alone conduct a credible, transparent election next year.
Raising the alarm over what he described as a calculated plot to impose a one-party state ahead of the 2027 general elections, Senator Mark accused APC leadership and President Tinubu of attempts to weaken the opposition parties.
Other News
He said: “The agenda is very clear: to create a situation where, in 2027, President Tinubu emerges as the only option left for the people, despite the widespread suffering and wanton killings going on across the country. The twin challenge of deepening poverty and a worsening security situation in the country did not just happen. They are direct consequences of the failure of this government.
“They know that Nigerians will not want this to continue. They know Nigerians will vote them out. This is why they would do anything to hang on to power by hook or crook. The crux of the matter is the interpretation of what constitutes status quo ante bellum, which the Court of Appeal directed should be maintained.”
Continuing, Mark said, “From all authoritative counsels at our disposal, there is no legal interpretation or precedent that could lead to the outcome that INEC seeks to foist on our party. Based on its press statement, INEC is pretending to be confused as to what constitutes the status quo ante bellum.
“If this were so, under the circumstances, what one would have expected was for INEC to approach the Court of Appeal to request a judicial interpretation of what truly represents the status quo under the circumstances. But it did not do this. While posturing to be neutral, its actions confirm that it has become irredeemably partisan, working, as it were, towards a preconceived agenda.
“With its action, INEC has left no one in doubt that it has chosen the path of dishonour and has become complicit in undermining Nigeria’s democracy. It can therefore no longer be trusted. What we say, in essence, is this: INEC cannot choose to fix the status quo from the day it took the administrative action to upload the names of the new ADC officials on its website, because INEC does not have the power to determine for any political party who its leaders should be.
“That decision was taken on July 29, not on September 9. With its press release, INEC has invented a status quo that never existed, because there was no time that the ADC did not have a duly constituted leadership. What INEC has done is to create a situation that, by its own curious logic, leaves the ADC without leadership. This certainly cannot be the status quo that the Court of Appeal directed should be preserved. It is an INEC invention that is not known to any Nigerian law,” he protested
Throwing the gauntlet, Mark said: “Right now, I speak to Nigerians at home and in the diaspora. I also speak directly to President Tinubu: with 90 per cent of the National Assembly and over 30 of Nigeria’s 36 governors in the APC, and ask what you are afraid of?
“If you are convinced that you have done well for the people who voted for you, why are you afraid of a free, fair, and transparent electoral contest? If you are indeed the democrat that you claim to be, why are you bent on destroying all opposition political parties? It is important to state the net implications of this decision taken by INEC, in case they had not thought of it, or they just do not care.
“First, by attempting to subvert the leadership of the ADC, INEC has already undermined our participation in the Osun and Ekiti elections. This INEC under Prof Amupitan will be held directly responsible for whatever actions or reactions follow this criminal path that it has chosen to take.
“We demand the immediate resignation or sack of the INEC Chairman, Amupitan, and all the National Commissioners. We no longer have confidence in them. We are convinced that they are incapable of conducting any credible election,” Senator Mark requested.
Expectedly, both the presidency, the national leadership of the ruling party, the electoral umpire boss, among many others, have stoutly stood in defence of the action taken against the coalition party.
While INEC claimed that ADC deserved whatever treatment meted out to it, the APC leadership urged the commission to deregister the coalition party, just as the Minister of FCT chided INEC for not automatically recognising Nafiu Bala Gombe as the national chairman of the party.
Amupitan, in defending his decision through a statement e-signed by Adedayo Oketola, his Chief Press Secretary, noted that while the commission recognises the right of stakeholders to express their views, it is imperative to clarify that the commission is a creation of the Constitution of Nigeria.
He emphasised that the appointment, tenure, and removal of the Chairman and National Commissioners are strictly governed by Section 157 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), warning that he does not hold office at the pleasure of any political party or interest group.
“Any call for removal outside the established constitutional process is not only a distraction but a direct assault on the independence of the nation’s electoral umpire. While a political party or a group is allowed to protect its interest, the commission decided to comply with the judgment of the Court of Appeal to avert a situation that occurred in Zamfara and Plateau states, where elected officials were removed by the Election Tribunal on account of the disobedience of Court Judgment.
“In addition, the commission did not want to disobey the preservative order of the court not to do anything or take any step that would render the processes already filed at the Federal High Court nugatory. Proceeding to monitor the congress and convention of the David Mark-led ADC would amount to a disobedience of that order since the relief claimed in the Originating Summons and other court processes filed include an order restraining INEC from monitoring any meeting, congress, and convention of the party,” the statement read.
Reacting further, he noted that, “INEC will not be drawn into the internal strife within political parties, nor will it allow itself to be used as a proxy for resolving organisational challenges that belong to the parties themselves, especially when the Court of Appeal has ordered that the matter be granted accelerated hearing.”
For Wike, “while INEC’s decision to withhold recognition of any faction within the ADC may appear neutral, the electoral body should have acted in line with the court position by recognising Bala Gombe. In my own opinion, INEC, by that judgment, ought to have recognised Bala Gombe as the ADC national chairman.”
But the APC’s chief scribe, Basiru, said: “We advice INEC to deregister the coalition of confusion party because they have no electoral value. They cannot be demonising INEC by calling for the sack of the chairman and National Commissioners.
“Assuming that the electoral umpire boss and the Commissioners are sacked, who will appoint the next set of people taking over from them. Instead of seeking court redress, they are calling for the sack. They are not ready to obey the law but prefer to threaten to go ahead with their scheduled activities, including the conduct of the convention, which shows that they have no regard for the court of law
“Since they are not just ready for elections, they cannot collapse the institution. It will be disingenuous for them to blame President Tinubu and the APC if they disobey the court. They have to put their house in order and stop blaming Tinubu or the APC,” the National Secretary said.
The party’s chief scribe, responding further to ADC’s call for the sack, said: “It further exposes a lack of seriousness and understanding of leadership processes of established institutions. As experienced politicians and former public office holders, they ought to know the constitutional process governing appointments and tenure within INEC.
“Those decisions are taken by the commission, not the Chairman alone. It is preposterous that these undemocratic elements dare to call for the removal of not only the INEC Chairman but the entire National Commissioners!” Senator Basiru quipped.
The implication is that the last may not have been heard about the unfolding incidents concerning the alleged plot to weaken the coalition party and how the politics of the 2027 presidential election will finally play out.
