Trending 
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)’s verdict on the African Democratic Congress (ADC)’s leadership tussle has attracted criticism from some Nigerian lawyers.
Nigeria’s electoral umpire announced on Wednesday that it would cease to recognise the former senator David Mark-led faction of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and that of Nafiu Gombe, who claims he ought to be the party’s national chairman.
The ADC has been facing a leadership tussle between factions: one led by Mark and another rival faction that claims to lead the party. A Court of Appeal judgment on the party’s leadership dispute said the party should maintain the status quo ante bellum, which means the situation as it was before the case began, while the matter continues in a lower court.
The court gave the ruling on March 12. INEC withdrew recognition of the Mark‑led faction as the official leadership of the ADC two weeks after the judgment. INEC’s verdict has unsettled members and supporters of the ADC, who allege that the commission is acting in the interest of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), a claim the party has denied.
A Controversial Resignation
At the centre of this dispute is Nafiu Gombe’s alleged resignation. Gombe has been involved in the party’s internal leadership structure and has served on its National Working Committee.
ADC spokesperson Bolaji Abdullahi said Gombe had resigned his position as a member of the party’s National Working Committee, effective May 26, 2025.
The letter, purportedly written by Gombe, resurfaced on Wednesday night. It stated that he stepped down to allow for “a smooth and effective coalition and restructuring” within the ADC.
Gombe had denied the resignation in August 2025, describing the letter as false and without merit.
The ADC serves as a coalition platform for opposition politicians seeking to unseat President Bola Tinubu in the 2027 election. Politicians from opposition parties, including the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the Labour Party, adopted the ADC as a coalition party, similar to the alliance that led to the formation of the APC.
Key figures who joined the ADC include former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, former Senator David Mark, former Minister of Transportation Rotimi Amaechi, and former Labour Party presidential candidate Peter Obi. The latest entrant is Rabiu Kwankwaso of the New Nigeria Peoples Party.
Mark was appointed national secretary of the party in 2025 after the former national chairman resigned, but the new members faced resistance from older members. The Independent National Electoral Commission, under the leadership of former chairman Mahmood Yakubu, officially recognised the David Mark-led leadership of the party in September 2025.
Gombe opposed the decision and took the matter to court. In March 2026, the Court of Appeal ruled that the party should maintain the status quo ante bellum while the case continues at a lower court.
Lawyers Fault INEC
Some lawyers have faulted INEC for its decision to stop recognising Mark as the party’s chairman.
According to Nigerian lawyer Inibehe Effiong, who faulted INEC’s decision, INEC’s decision is a plot to truncate the upcoming 2027 elections.
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.
From what is publicly available, all the Executives of the ADC resigned to allow David Mark and…
— Inibehe Effiong (@InibeheEffiong) April 1, 2026
“There is now a reasonable basis to infer the existence of a well-orchestrated sinister conspiracy to truncate contested and credible elections in 2027,” said Effiong.
“Before the suit, who was the Chairman of the Party? Was it not David Mark? Is this INEC saying that the Order of the Court of Appeal implies that there should be a leadership vacuum in the ADC until the case is determined by the Federal High Court?”
Human rights activist and lawyer, Chidi Odinkalu, slammed INEC for interpreting the Appeal Court’s judgement.
This release by @inecnigeria followed a meeting involving senior leaders of the Commission, & @NGRPresident, @CourtOfAppealNG, @FederalHigh in the last 60 hours.
I have it on the most impeccable authority that there is a pre-signed resignation letter by Chairman Amupitan. It… https://t.co/XatGw5t36p
— Chidi Anselm Odinkalu, CGoF (@ChidiOdinkalu) April 1, 2026
“It should be evident to a professor of law & #SAN that is not the business of@inecnigeria to interpret the decision of the Court of Appeal. If they had any doubt, an #INEC governed by good faith shd have gone back to the Court of Appeal to secure an interpretation of the decision,” Odinkalu wrote on X.
Another lawyer, Tunde Adejumo, argued that INEC should have maintained the existing state of affairs, leaving all names on its portal intact and refraining from any actions that might affect the merits of the pending suit.
STATUS QUO ANTE BELLUM AND ITS APPLICATION IN THE ADC LEADERSHIP CASE
The confusion here appears to arise from an imprecise appreciation of the meaning and scope of an order directing the maintenance of the “status quo ante bellum”.
Status quo ante bellum has been defined as… https://t.co/PYy34wXeug
— NaijaAttorney (@TundeAdejumo9) April 1, 2026
“In my view, regardless of how broadly the meaning or effect of status quo ante bellum is conceived, it ought not to be interpreted in a manner that effectively resolves or lends validation to issues that remain contested and yet to be determined by the Court, an outcome INEC appears to have reached in this instance,” said Adejuwom.
“Any order for removal of names is properly within the purview of the trial Court, should it grant the motion for interlocutory injunction or the reliefs sought in the substantive suit. It is not for INEC to take such a step independently.”
