A deepening leadership crisis within the African Democratic Congress (ADC) has exposed sharp divisions within the party, with rival factions trading accusations over legitimacy, court orders and the role of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), in a dispute that could shape its readiness for the 2027 general election.
At the centre of the standoff are conflicting interpretations of a Court of Appeal directive on maintaining the status quo, as well as competing claims to the party’s national leadership.
A chieftain of the party and lawyer, Kenneth Okonkwo, alleged that there is a deliberate plot to destabilise the ADC, warning that external forces may be seeking to truncate the party ahead of 2027.
“It is very ridiculous for a man… to go to court to challenge the leadership of ADC,” Okonkwo said, arguing that one of the key figures behind the challenge had earlier resigned from the party.
He maintained that INEC’s recognition of the leadership led by former Senate President, David Mark, remains valid, adding that “once INEC recognises you, you cannot use an interlocutory injunction to stop an action already executed.”
On the Court of Appeal directive, Okonkwo said: “Maintaining status quo means you should not do anything that will disadvantage either party. INEC has already recognised us… what the court said confirmed our leadership.”
He dismissed claims that the order referred to a period before INEC’s recognition, insisting instead that “status quo means there is a national leadership in place.”
Okonkwo also questioned the legal strategy of the opposing camp, stating that “originating summons is used when facts are not in dispute,” and argued that allegations such as coercion must be proven through substantive suits.
He further warned against what he described as attempts to pressure INEC through repeated correspondence, saying: “If INEC does that, then know that APC influenced it… they are using these letters to mount pressure.”
Urging restraint, he added: “Allow the court to decide. All these letters and propaganda should not replace due process.”
However, the Acting National Publicity Secretary of the party, Bashir Abdul-Mohammed, offered a sharply different account, describing the crisis as self-inflicted and rooted in what he called an unlawful takeover.
“We are not in a banana republic… we are all subject to the law,” Abdul-Mohammed said, insisting that the party’s constitution was clear on succession.
Citing the ADC constitution, he argued that “when a national chairman resigns, the deputy national chairman takes over,” maintaining that Nafiu Bala remains the legitimate acting chairman.
He described the rival camp as ”usurpers temporarily sojourning and holding power,” and said their emergence was being challenged in court.
On the appellate court ruling, Abdul-Mohammed insisted: “Status quo ante bellum simply means the state of affairs should return to how it was before the dispute… the national chairman is Nafiu Bala.”
He accused INEC of failing to comply with court directives, stating that “INEC is… flagrantly and blatantly disobeying court orders,” and warned that the party may initiate contempt proceedings.
The spokesman also dismissed as forged a purported resignation letter attributed to Bala. “Let me dismiss it outright. This is forged. This is not his signature,” he said, adding that the matter is already before the court.
While rejecting allegations of external backing, Abdul-Mohammed maintained that the faction’s actions were driven by the need to uphold the rule of law. He called on INEC to “do the needful as soon as possible” by correcting its records and recognising Bala’s leadership.
