-The Case, The Facts, The Issues
By Sanni Abdullahi, Kehinde Jacobs and Chucks Nwonye
The Court of Appeal in Abuja on Monday upheld a Federal High Court judgment that restrains the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, from recognizing or participating in any state congresses organized by the David Mark-led leadership of the African Democratic Congress, ADC.
In a split decision of two-to-one, the appellate court affirmed the April 29, 2026 ruling of Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court, Abuja, which declared that the caretaker/interim National Working Committee headed by former Senate President David Mark lacked the constitutional power to conduct state congresses or appoint committees for that purpose.
The judgment effectively maintains the de-recognition of the congresses conducted under the Mark-led caretaker structure and leaves the existing state working committees and state executive committees in place until properly constituted congresses are held.
The Ruling
Delivering the lead judgment, the appellate court held that both the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the constitution of the ADC vest the responsibility for conducting state congresses in the duly elected state executive committees of the party, not in the national executive committee or a caretaker body appointed at the national level.
The court specifically affirmed Justice Abdulmalik’s finding that the four-year tenure of the ADC’s state working committees and state executive committees “remains valid and subsisting” pending the conduct of congresses in line with the party’s constitution and the eventual convocation of a national convention.
According to the panel, the Mark-led caretaker/interim NWC was set up to manage the affairs of the party in the interim, but that mandate did not extend to dissolving subsisting state structures or midwifing new ones without recourse to the provisions of the party’s governing documents.
“The power to organise state congresses does not reside in a caretaker committee imposed from the national headquarters,” the court stated in its reasoning. “To hold otherwise would be to permit the national body to override the autonomy of state chapters as contemplated by the party’s constitution.”
One member of the three-man panel dissented, but the majority opinion carried the day, meaning the status quo ante remains.
Background to the Suit
The dispute arose after the ADC’s national leadership under Senator David Mark inaugurated a caretaker committee and subsequently announced plans to hold state congresses across the country.
Aggrieved members of the party, including Don Norman Obinna, Johnny Tovie Derek, Obah Ehigiator, Olona Yinka, Charles Omideji, Samuel Pam Gyang, and Obianyo Patrick, filed suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/581/2026. They sued for themselves and on behalf of all state chairmen and state executive committees of the ADC.
The plaintiffs contended that the caretaker body had no constitutional authority under the ADC constitution to organise state congresses or appoint committees to conduct them. They argued that such actions amounted to an usurpation of the powers of the state executives whose tenure, they said, had not yet expired.
In her April 29 judgment, Justice Abdulmalik granted an order restraining INEC, its agents, and officials from recognising, monitoring, or according any form of legitimacy to congresses conducted by the Mark-led leadership. She also held that INEC must continue to relate only with the subsisting state executives until fresh congresses are conducted in accordance with the law.
Dissatisfied, the Mark-led faction appealed, seeking to set aside the decision and to compel INEC to recognise its congresses. The appeal court, however, found no merit in that argument.
Why The Court Upheld The De-Recognition
Legal analysts following the case say the court’s decision rested on three core principles:
First, Tenure and Continuity. The court accepted the plaintiffs’ argument that the tenure of the existing state executive committees had not lapsed. Until that tenure expires or is validly terminated through congress, those executives remain the lawful representatives of the party at state level.
Second, Party supremacy and internal democracy. The panel held that political parties must be bound by their own constitutions. The ADC constitution, the court noted, assigns the conduct of state congresses to the state executive committees. A national caretaker committee cannot unilaterally override that provision.
Third, INEC’s role The court reiterated that INEC’s duty is to monitor congresses conducted in accordance with a party’s constitution and the Electoral Act. Where there is a dispute over the legitimacy of the convening authority, INEC must refrain from participation until the courts resolve the issue.
By affirming the lower court, the Appeal Court effectively told the Mark-led leadership that it cannot use a caretaker arrangement to dissolve and replace state structures mid-tenure.
Implications For The ADC
The judgment leaves the ADC in a delicate position ahead of future elections. With INEC barred from recognising congresses organised by the caretaker committee, the party cannot present candidates from those state structures for elections, nor can it update its membership records with the commission based on those exercises.
Party stakeholders say the ruling now forces the ADC to return to the drawing board and convene a national convention that complies with its constitution. Only such a convention, according to the court’s reasoning, can validly set a timeline and process for new state congresses.
For the subsisting state chairmen and executives who filed the suit, the decision is a validation of their claim that internal party processes must not be short-circuited. For the Mark-led caretaker team, it is a setback that limits its ability to reorganise the party ahead of 2027.
Political observers note that the case highlights a recurring challenge in Nigerian politics: the tension between interim national leaderships seeking to “reposition” parties and existing state structures seeking to protect their mandates.
INEC has not issued a formal statement on the judgment, but commission officials are expected to comply by continuing to recognise only the state executives whose tenure the court affirmed.
With the appeal dismissed, the Mark-led leadership’s options now include either appealing to the Supreme Court or initiating a fresh process that aligns with the party constitution and the court’s interpretation of it.
For now, the court has spoken: the ADC’s state executives stay, and the caretaker committee cannot conduct congresses on its own.
