“Unraveling the ADC Crisis: Internal Legal Battles Exposed”
Two Nigerian attorneys, Inibehe Effiong and Bodunde Opeyemi, have linked the ongoing leadership turmoil within the African Democratic Congress (ADC) to internal legal procedures and enforceable court decisions, rejecting assertions of outside interference.
They articulated this during a discussion with reporters on Thursday in Abuja.
Their insights emerge amidst an intensified public discourse regarding the role of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and conjectures about political influence in the conflict.
Effiong, a lawyer focused on public interest, condemned the legal tactic employed by the faction led by David Mark, labeling it as procedurally flawed.
He clarified that the Federal High Court did not issue any restraining order but rather mandated that all parties be notified, a standard legal procedure necessitating both sides to present their arguments.
In his view, the appropriate approach would have been to contest the issue at the trial court rather than initiating an interlocutory appeal.
He referred to the choice to appeal at that juncture as “irregular” and “messy,” cautioning that further appeals could exacerbate rather than resolve the conflict.
Opeyemi, for his part, traced the roots of the crisis to a leadership contest following a party assembly in July 2025, which resulted in a new executive.
The situation intensified when a party official contested the results at the Federal High Court, attempting to restrain both the new leadership and INEC from acknowledging it.
Although the court declined to issue an interim order, the case advanced to the Court of Appeal, which in March 2026 instructed all parties to maintain the status quo ante bellum, indicating the situation should remain as it was prior to the legal filing.
Opeyemi underscored that the directive is explicit and enforceable, obligating all parties to sustain the pre-dispute conditions and refrain from actions that could affect the case’s resolution.
The lawyers remarked that INEC’s choice not to recognize any faction of the party is in accordance with the court order.
Opeyemi elaborated that the commission is legally bound to adhere and cannot take a position while the case remains pending in court, cautioning that any contrary action could constitute a breach of a valid judicial command.
Both legal authorities concluded that the ADC crisis arises from internal disagreements and legal maneuvers rather than external interference, noting that the deadlock is likely to continue until the Federal High Court renders a final ruling on the substantive case.
