In a decision that has sent shockwaves through Nigeria’s political elite, the Abuja High Court set aside the Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) order recognising former Lagos Governor Mark Aregbesola as the new Chairman of the Action Democratic Congress (ADC) and its Secretary. The court’s stay declares that the current official appointment remains null and void until the parties can resolve their internal dispute in court.
The Decision The court, sitting in its “Judicial Review Division,” dissolved INEC’s recognition on the basis that the Commission had acted beyond the scope of its statutory mandate. Judge Abiodun Olatunde, the presiding magistrate, noted in his written judgment that “a public institution such as INEC may not attend to intra‑party disputes that are to be decided by the parties themselves unless the parties explicitly waive the right to apply for an external intervention.” The court highlighted that Aregbesola’s ascension to the top of the ADC had been marred by allegations of unfair primaries, procedural irregularities, and the refusal of the party’s former leadership to accept the tribunal’s ruling that had named a different candidate: former Kaduna State governor Salisu Usman. That ruling was, however, set aside by the Lagos High Court on procedural grounds, leaving the ADC in a state of leadership limbo. “We are dealing with an internal election that has not been properly sanctioned,” Judge Olatunde said, adding that the court would examine whether “the ADC’s constitution permits the appointment of a new chairman without party-level ratification.” The court’s next hearing is scheduled for mid‑September.
Aregbesola’s Response Aregbesola, who is now seen as one of the most potent figures in the federal landscape, rallied his camp around a staunch defence of his campaign. In a brief online press conference, he said, “The ADC is a democratic party; our leadership elections are not governed by no one’s whims. We have exercised our constitutional right to nominate our leaders.” He also castigated INEC as “a tool of the political establishment that has been used to silence legitimate opposition.” He has requested that the court revisit its ruling and that the case be expedited, citing the potential for an existential threat to the ADC’s brand and an impending “data gathering” platform that would be delayed if leadership is not confirmed.
INEC’s Position INEC, represented by Commissioner-Aide Chris is himself believed to be a close ally of the current chair, faced a setback that compounded the year’s echoing tussle over electoral validity. INEC’s spokesperson said in a statement that “the Order was made following an application from the ADC’s registered members who had no objection to Ms. Ojemudia as the new Chairman. The Commission respects the constitutional process of judicial review and will remain neutral.” The organisation further assured that its administrative systems would remain unchanged for the ADC’s day‑to‑day activities.
ADC’s Internal Strife The ADC, which was formed in 2015 as a splinter from the People’s Democratic Party, has seen an unmistakable claim to leadership from two factions. Both sides lean on different histories: one undergraduates from a war‑torn Fawaz, the other from a coalition that includes Aregbesola’s political rivals. The internal tension is more than a personal quarrel; it is a reflection of the wider realignment of Nigeria’s political order. The Aregbesola faction argues that the ADC’s constitution requires a two‑thirds majority in a party‑wide vote for top appointments, a requirement they claim was met. The other faction says that under the ADC National Assembly, the difference in voting systems, coupled with a board decision in a 2023 ruling that invalidated certain ballots, disqualifies Aregbesola’s election.
Implications The legal axe has wider repercussions beyond the ADC. The decision underscores the delicate balance between electoral bodies and political parties. It forces parties and government institutions to be more cautious in how they interpret and enforce intraparty elections. Similarly, as the 2027 general elections loom, the outcome could reshape left‑leaning coalitions. The ADC has potentially been a kingmaker in urban centers, where its vast membership base has underpinned coalition politics. Without a solidified leadership, it risks losing momentum, a scenario the country’s other parties are keenly watching. Opposition leaders from rival parties have expressed tight-lipped contentment while also cautioning that any further intervention from INEC might erode faith in democratic processes. “We’re all careful about the blur of recognition,” said the leader of the Green Party of Nigeria, Adeyinka Ajimobi. “The institutional checks are crucial; if we overlook these, the entire democracy will be at stake.” The court’s stay also means that current “formalities” – such as party membership cards, campaign documents, and even advertising contracts – may be considered void. White’s “Political Governance in Africa” notes, “When elections are contested inside a party, but the executive still acts as if they’re authoritative, it can cause a paradox” — a scenario the Nigerian polity will need to confront.
The Way Forward The next hearing, set for September 12, will test whether the legal houses of the ADC’s two factions ultimately converge on a reconciliation or whether the party will fracture further – risking a permanent spill over into the larger National Assembly. Aregbesola’s campaign, meanwhile, is lurching to dual strategies:Mobilising grassroots; and lobbying the People’s Democratic Party for a formal alliance that would bypass the ADC’s internal stalemate. In the meanwhile, his rival camp is in tune with allied parties hoping to coalesce that weakening fragmentation. The court’s stay has pulled a sobering reminder that democracy in Nigeria is not just about electoral gears but also about institutional clarity. The legal class will be watching; the world will be watching. We await the final verdict.