The presence of a functioning and active opposition party is one of the most important requirements of a multiparty democracy, the type we claim to practice in Nigeria. Anyone with their eyes peeled as regards the current happenings would then observe that this key requirement has been missing from Nigeria’s democracy since the APC assumed office in 2015. The People’s Democratic party (PDP) which is the largest political party in the country after the ruling APC has been perhaps the worst opposition the country has seen in recent times, failing woefully in the constitutional duty of holding the incumbents accountable.
This perhaps explains why Nigerians heaved a sigh of relief upon the advent of the newfound coalition, which has found for itself in the ADC a new home, containing familiar opposition faces such as Atiku Abubakar, Peter Obi, David Mark to mention a few.
THE BACKGROUND OF THE CONFLICT
The newfound ADC coalition has now headed straight into some very fresh conflict, one that is attempting to thwart the legitimacy of the entity itself. On July 29, 2025, a new caretaker committee emerged in the ADC, headed by David Mark as national chairman and Rauf Aregbesola as national secretary, following the resignation of the previous party executives led by Ralph Nwosu.
On September 9, 2025, INEC recognised the new ADC leadership and published their particulars on its website. Meanwhile, Nafiu Bala, a former national vice chairman of the party, challenged the arrangement at the Federal High Court in Abuja, arguing that he should assume leadership in line with the party’s constitution. On September 2, 2025, days before INEC recgonised the new executives, Mr Bala filed a lawsuit against Mr Mark’s leadership at the Federal High Court in Abuja.
But Mr Mark’s group filed an interlocutory appeal at the Court of Appeal, which was dismissed in a ruling delivered on March 12, 2026. In the ruling, the appellate court ordered that the parties, including INEC, which is listed as the fourth respondent, “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 or otherwise rendering nugatory the proceedings before the trial court.” Days later, on March 16, INEC received letters from both factions, each with different requests. Mr Bala’s group, represented by Summit Law Chambers, asked the commission to recognise it, citing the judgement of the appeal court.
On the other hand, Mr Mark’s group, represented by Suleiman Usman SAN & Co, asked INEC not to recognise Mr Bala as the party’s chairperson on the account that the substantive suit about the leadership dispute was pending before the Federal High Court. INEC said it interpreted the status quo ante bellum as the state of affairs that existed before September 2, 2025, which is the date the initial lawsuit regarding the ADC leadership dispute was filed at the Federal High Court.
The commission declined Mr Nafiu’s request to be recognised as the national chairman pending the outcome of the case.The electoral body also said that it would remove from its portal the names of members of the party’s NWC led by Mr Mark, which was uploaded on September 9, days after the suit was filed. The Mr. Mark led administration has however disagreed with INEC’s interpretation, claiming that the correct status quo ante was that which prevailed on July 29, 2025, blaming INEC for leaving the party without a leader. A substantive judgement is expected to be passed by the supreme court on the 22nd of April.
A very important highlight of the ADC crisis is the hand of the ruling APC showing up in the party’s affairs. The clearest example of this interference has to do with the convention recently held in the Federal Capital Territory, where the party was disallowed from using the Eagles square for the event.
The private facility secured for the event also reported threats by the FCT minister, although the event was later held at that location. Some individuals have also claimed that the manner in which INEC chose to interpret the court ruling had influences from the APC, this remains to be confirmed by later events.
What does this mean for the ADC in 2027?
As of today, the ADC appears to be the only serious opposition party in the country and the crisis happening within it must make everyone scratch their head in the search for an actual multiparty democracy. If not promptly resolved, this conflict may prevent the ADC from conducting party primaries and fielding candidates in the coming elections. Even if primaries are conducted and candidates are put forward, the leadership tussle might cause post-election problems where the legitimacy of the fielded candidates may be questioned on account of the process that brought them to power.
The quality and timeliness of the Supreme Court ruling would determine a lot of things for the ADC and until then, fingers are crossed. It is the hope of this writer that the ADC comes out of this conflict fast enough, that the APC might at least have an opposition to contend with come 2027 and Nigerians can at least have some hope towards a better governance in the soon to be 66-year-old Nigeria.
