The decision by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to withdraw its recognition of Senator David Mark and former Osun State governor, Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola, as the National Chairman and National Secretary of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) has sparked widespread outrage across Nigeria’s political and legal circles.
Senior lawyers, political analysts, activists and opposition figures have raised alarm over the development, warning that the electoral body’s action could have far-reaching implications for Nigeria’s democracy and the credibility of the 2027 general elections.
INEC had on Wednesday announced that it would remove the names of the National Working Committee (NWC) led by Mark from its portal following its review of ongoing litigation over the party’s leadership.
In a statement posted on its official X handle, the electoral body said the action was taken in compliance with the ruling of the Court of Appeal in Appeal No. CA/ABJ/145/2026 involving Senator David Mark and Hon. Nafiu Bala Gombe.
According to the commission, the names of the NWC members led by Mark were uploaded on its portal on September 9, 2025, seven days after the suit challenging their leadership was instituted.
“Since the names of the current National Working Committee members led by Senator David Mark were uploaded on 9th September 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,” the commission said.
INEC also stated that it would refrain from taking any action capable of prejudicing the ongoing court proceedings in line with the preservatory orders issued by the appellate court.
“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,” the commission quoted from the Court of Appeal ruling.
The commission further declared that it would no longer receive communications from any of the factions laying claim to the ADC leadership and would not monitor any meeting, congress or convention convened by any group in the party until the substantive suit before the Federal High Court in Abuja is determined.
Background to the dispute
The leadership crisis in the ADC began after members of the Ralph Okey Nwosu-led executive committee resigned and ratified the appointment of a new National Working Committee led by Senator David Mark during a National Executive Council meeting on July 29, 2025.
However, Nafiu Bala Gombe, who was the party’s Vice National Chairman, later rejected the development, insisting he never resigned and should automatically assume leadership following Nwosu’s exit in accordance with the party’s constitution.
He subsequently approached the Federal High Court in Abuja on September 2, 2025, seeking an order restraining Mark’s group from parading themselves as leaders of the party and asking the court to compel INEC to recognise him as acting national chairman.
In its judgment delivered on March 12, 2026, the Court of Appeal dismissed an interlocutory appeal filed by Mark challenging the jurisdiction of the trial court and ordered accelerated hearing of the case.
The appellate court also directed all parties to maintain the status quo pending the determination of the substantive suit.
But INEC’s interpretation of the ruling and its decision to remove Mark and Aregbesola from its records have triggered a wave of criticism from lawyers, civil society actors and opposition politicians.
‘Dangerous precedent’
Human rights lawyer and former chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, Prof. Chidi Odinkalu, was among the first prominent voices to criticise the commission’s action.
In a post on X, Odinkalu alleged that the decision followed pressure from powerful political actors and raised troubling questions about the independence of the electoral body.
“This release by INEC followed a meeting involving senior leaders of the Commission and top officials of government in the last 60 hours,” he wrote.
Odinkalu further made a startling claim that the INEC chairman had allegedly pre-signed a resignation letter as a condition for his appointment, suggesting that the threat of invoking the letter was used to compel the commission to issue the statement.
“I have it on the most impeccable authority that there is a pre-signed resignation letter by Chairman Amupitan. It was a pre-condition for his appointment. Ultimately, that had to be called in aid by those who persuaded him to issue this release,” he said.
Beyond the allegation, Odinkalu argued that it was not the responsibility of INEC to interpret the Court of Appeal judgment.
“It should be evident to a professor of law and Senior Advocate of Nigeria that it is not the business of INEC to interpret the decision of the Court of Appeal,” he said.
“If they had any doubt, an INEC governed by good faith should have gone back to the Court of Appeal to secure an interpretation of the decision.”
‘INEC acting as adverse umpire’
Another human rights lawyer, Abdul Mahmud, also criticised the electoral commission, accusing it of abandoning neutrality.
Mahmud argued that INEC should have sought clarification from the court before taking action.
“INEC should have approached the Court of Appeal for clarification of its preservative order to maintain status quo ante bellum,” he said.
“Instead, it chose to act as an adverse umpire rather than a neutral arbiter.”
He went further to suggest that the decision reflected political interference.
“Clearly, BAT is teleguiding INEC,” he said, referring to President Bola Tinubu.
Mahmud explained that preservatory orders are designed to freeze a dispute at the point before it escalates so that no party gains an unfair advantage.
According to him, the key question is which prior state of affairs the court intended to preserve.
“Did the dispute begin on September 2, 2025 when Nafiu Bala approached the High Court, or on July 29, 2025 when the leadership change occurred?” he asked.
“In my view, the dispute began on July 29, 2025 when the change in leadership occurred. That is the moment the controversy crystallised.”
If that interpretation is correct, he argued, then the relevant status quo should be the situation before that date.
‘A sinister conspiracy’
For another human rights lawyer, Inibehe Effiong, the development raises deeper concerns about the future of Nigeria’s electoral process.
Effiong described INEC’s action as illegal and warned that it could be part of a broader plot to undermine competitive elections in 2027.
“The ADC is not my cup of tea, but there is now reasonable basis to infer existence of a well orchestrated sinister conspiracy to truncate contested and credible elections in 2027,” he said.
He also questioned whether disputes over political party leadership should even be the subject of court intervention.
“Is dispute over the leadership of a political party no longer the internal affairs of the party?” he asked.
“It used to be the law that issues of political party leadership are non-justiciable.”
Effiong further wondered whether INEC was suggesting that the party should remain without leadership until the case is decided.
“Is this INEC saying that the order of the Court of Appeal implies that there should be leadership vacuum in the ADC until the case is determined?” he asked.
Fears of a one-candidate election
The controversy has also attracted the attention of scholars and commentators.
United States-based professor of journalism and columnist, Farooq Kperogi, warned that the decision could signal a dangerous erosion of democratic competition ahead of the 2027 elections.
In a widely circulated commentary titled “INEC, David Mark, and Coming Abachaian Coronation,” Kperogi argued that the electoral body’s decision suggests an attempt to weaken opposition parties.
“With INEC’s overtly partisan and intentionally illegal withdrawal of recognition for the David Mark-led ADC, Nigeria has officially reverted to full-on Abacha-era suffocation of even the wispiest pretense to competitive electoral politics,” he wrote.
According to him, the judgment cited by INEC actually supports the continuation of Mark’s leadership pending the final determination of the case.
“Lawyers have said that the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which INEC invoked as a convenient crutch, said the status quo should be maintained,” he said.
“In other words, David Mark should remain the chairman until the merit of the appeal is determined.”
Kperogi warned that the move could pave the way for a political environment where the ruling party faces little or no meaningful opposition.
“It seems obvious that Tinubu wants a coronation, not a competitive election in 2027,” he wrote.
ADC rejects INEC’s action
Meanwhile, the Mark-led ADC has strongly rejected the commission’s interpretation of the court ruling.
In a statement issued by the party’s National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, the party accused INEC of yielding to political pressure.
“We reject INEC’s interpretation of the Court of Appeal ruling,” Abdullahi said.
“We knew that INEC was being pressured by a government that has become jittery from the ADC’s rising momentum.”
According to him, the commission’s statement was riddled with contradictions and failed to reflect the actual position of the court.
“INEC’s press statement is full of contradictions that fly in the face of both facts and reason,” he said.
The party said it is currently reviewing its options and will announce its next steps in due course.
Momodu slams INEC
Media entrepreneur and ADC chieftain, Dele Momodu, also criticised the electoral body, describing its conduct as damaging to Nigeria’s democratic journey.
“INEC has been a debilitating albatross on Nigeria,” he said.
Momodu recalled that Nigeria’s democratic challenges date back to the annulment of the June 12, 1993 presidential election won by the late Moshood Abiola.
“The speed at which the current INEC swiftly recognised the Wike faction of the PDP immediately convinced me about the robotic nature of our INEC,” he said.
According to him, the ruling party’s political strength should make it confident enough to face credible opposition rather than allegedly weakening rival parties.
“With all the governors coerced or cajoled and converted to APC, the ruling party is still jittery,” he said.
Momodu warned that the ultimate goal could be to produce a single candidate in the 2027 presidential election.
“The ultimate aim is to produce a sole candidate in the 2027 presidential election,” he said.
“The last time such a brazen attempt was made was during the Abacha era.”