The Federal High Court judgment nullifying the leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) led by former Senate President David Mark has triggered sharp political reactions, with former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar vowing to appeal the decision, while opposition figures and presidential aides traded accusations over the party’s leadership crisis.
The judgment, delivered on Thursday by Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court, Abuja, invalidated the Mark-led leadership and decisions taken under its authority, including the process that produced Atiku as the party’s presidential candidate for the 2027 general elections.
The court also directed the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) not to recognise or act on decisions taken at the ADC’s 99th National Executive Committee meeting held on July 27, 2025.
The ruling followed a suit instituted by former ADC Deputy National Chairman (North-East), Nafiu Bala Gombe, who challenged the process through which Mark and other members of the caretaker committee assumed control of the party.
Justice Lifu held that the emergence of the Mark-led leadership violated the party’s constitution, relevant provisions of the Electoral Act and the 1999 Constitution.
Reacting, Atiku described the judgment as an attempt to weaken the opposition and frustrate his presidential ambition, insisting that the party would challenge the decision at the Court of Appeal.
His position was contained in a statement issued on Thursday by the Director of Strategic Communication of the ADC Presidential Campaign Council, Phrank Shaibu, titled, ‘The Panic Is Real — Atiku’.
Atiku questioned the timing of the judgment, which came barely a day after the ADC held a campaign rally in Sokoto State, attracting what he described as a massive crowd.
He argued that the turnout reflected Nigerians’ growing desire for political change and support for the party’s promise to address the rising cost of living.
“The people of Sokoto came out in their thousands because they are hungry for change and believe in our promise to make life affordable again,” he said.
The former Vice-President alleged that the ruling was designed to weaken his political support in Northern Nigeria and disrupt the momentum generated by the rally.
He, however, insisted that his political ambition had national appeal, arguing that economic hardship was affecting Nigerians across regional and geographical boundaries.
Atiku also questioned why another suit was instituted against the Mark-led leadership despite an earlier judgment by the same Federal High Court, which he claimed had upheld its legitimacy.
He cited a judgment delivered by Justice Musa Liman on July 2, 2026, in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1637/2025, which dismissed a challenge to the leadership on grounds including jurisdiction, standing and failure to exhaust internal party remedies.
“Why, after that judgment, was another case filed to reopen the same dispute? This is a calculated attempt to circumvent a subsisting judgment. We will challenge this judicial manoeuvre at the Court of Appeal,” he said.
Similarly, the ADC rejected the latest judgment, describing it as an attempt to deny Nigerians their democratic right to choose their leaders in the 2027 elections.
In a statement signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, the party questioned the timing of the ruling, alleging that it was influenced by the success of its Sokoto rally.
The party maintained that the dispute went beyond the political fortunes of Atiku and Mark, warning that the ruling could affect thousands of its members seeking elective positions across the country.
It also challenged the legal basis of the judgment, citing the earlier decision by Justice Liman, which it said had affirmed the legitimacy of the Mark-led National Working Committee and directed INEC to recognise the leadership.
The ADC argued that a court of coordinate jurisdiction could not review or nullify the subsisting judgment of another court of equal jurisdiction.
However, the party said it was awaiting the Certified True Copy of Thursday’s judgment to establish its precise terms, scope and implications before pursuing further legal action.
The opposition party also accused the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) of using the judiciary to frustrate political opponents whenever they gained momentum.
Warning against what it described as attempts to eliminate political competition, the ADC cautioned that the development could threaten national peace and stability.
“We warn the APC: do not play with fires you cannot control. The peace and stability of Nigeria are bigger than the ambition of any president or political party,” the statement said.
Meanwhile, the presidential candidate of the African Action Congress (AAC), Omoyele Sowore, accused President Bola Tinubu of using court cases and intimidation to weaken opposition politicians ahead of the 2027 elections.
Sowore, in a post on X on Thursday, described the legal battles confronting opposition parties, particularly the ADC, as part of an alleged strategy to discourage Nigerians from challenging the ruling party.
He also accused the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, of influencing the legal manoeuvres against political opponents.
“The court cases against political parties, at this point, the ADC, are part of Tinubu’s strategic plans to confuse and dissuade Nigerians seeking to run against him,” Sowore alleged.
He further claimed that violence was deployed against political opponents who could not be stopped through court proceedings.
However, presidential aide Daniel Bwala offered a contrasting interpretation, defending the court’s decision and accusing the Mark-led leadership of taking over the ADC without following due process.
In a post on his X platform, Bwala argued that a political party seeking to govern Nigeria must demonstrate commitment to justice, equity and respect for the rule of law.
“A political party that wants to govern Nigeria must be a party of due process, equity and justice.
“You descended on ADC like a thief in the night, took over its leadership undemocratically and hoped that all is well,” he wrote.
Bwala further accused the Mark-led executive of violating the party’s constitution, the Nigerian Constitution, the Electoral Act and INEC guidelines.
The conflicting reactions have further exposed the political divisions surrounding the ADC leadership crisis, with supporters of the Mark-led faction describing the judgment as an attempt to undermine opposition politics, while its critics insist that the party must first resolve questions surrounding the legality of its leadership.
As the legal battle moves towards the appellate court, the immediate challenge for the ADC will be determining the future of its leadership structure, presidential ticket and other candidates ahead of the 2027 general elections.
