…Controversy Trails INEC’s Decision to Delist Mark, Aregbesola, Halt Engagements With Party.
By Yinka Giwa
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has stepped into the deepening leadership crisis rocking the African Democratic Congress (ADC), announcing a sweeping set of measures that have immediately sparked controversy among party stakeholders.
In a detailed statement issued on April 1, 2026, the electoral umpire confirmed receiving conflicting legal communications from opposing factions within the ADC—one aligned with David Mark and another backing Nafiu Bala Gombe—each laying claim to the party’s leadership and urging the Commission to act in their favour.
While one faction warned INEC against recognising Gombe as acting national chairman due to a pending suit at the Federal High Court, the opposing camp demanded immediate enforcement of a Court of Appeal judgment which, they argued, effectively invalidates the leadership of Mark and his allies, including Rauf Aregbesola.
The dispute stems from Appeal No. CA/ABJ/145/2026, in which the Court of Appeal dismissed an interlocutory appeal filed by Mark and issued preservatory orders directing all parties to maintain the “status quo ante bellum” pending the determination of the substantive suit before the Federal High Court.
However, the interpretation of that ruling has sharply divided the parties—and now placed INEC squarely at the centre of the storm.
INEC disclosed that it has also been accused by Gombe’s legal team of disobeying the appellate court by continuing to engage with Mark’s faction, including inviting them to a stakeholders’ meeting and monitoring a purported National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting.
Despite these accusations and mounting pressure from both sides, the Commission said it undertook a comprehensive review of the judgment, court filings, and the sequence of events leading up to the dispute.
It noted that the current National Working Committee (NWC) of the ADC emerged from a NEC meeting held on 29 July 2025, following the resignation of the previous executive led by Ralph Okey Nwosu. That leadership, headed by Mark, was subsequently recognised by INEC in September 2025.
Gombe, who served as Vice National Chairman, has contested that process, insisting he never resigned and should have automatically assumed leadership in line with the party’s constitution after the chairman’s exit. He subsequently approached the Federal High Court seeking to restrain INEC from recognising Mark’s leadership and to affirm his own claim.
The matter escalated when Mark challenged interim proceedings at the trial court, leading to the appeal which was dismissed on 12 March 2026, with the Court of Appeal ordering accelerated hearing of the substantive case and directing all parties to maintain the status quo.
In what is now proving to be the most contentious aspect of its decision, INEC resolved to interpret the “status quo ante bellum” as the state of affairs before the suit was filed on 2 September 2025—effectively nullifying all subsequent developments.
Based on this position, the Commission announced that it would remove the names of the current ADC National Working Committee led by Mark from its official portal, having been uploaded after the suit was instituted.
Furthermore, INEC declared that it would neither recognise nor engage with any faction of the party pending the final determination of the case. It also said it would no longer monitor or acknowledge any meetings, congresses, or conventions organised in the name of the ADC by any group.
Significantly, the Commission rejected the request by Gombe’s camp to be installed as acting national chairman, insisting that doing so could prejudice the ongoing court proceedings.
INEC maintained that its actions are guided strictly by the need to comply with judicial directives and avoid taking steps that could “foist a fait accompli” on the court.
However, the Commission’s stance is already drawing criticism from observers who argue that its interpretation of the Appeal Court ruling—and its decision to effectively paralyse the party—could further inflame tensions within the ADC.
With both factions holding divergent readings of the same judgment, INEC’s refusal to recognise either side, while simultaneously removing previously recognised officials, is seen in some quarters as creating a leadership vacuum in the party.
The development raises broader concerns about the implications for party administration and preparedness ahead of the 2027 general elections, especially given INEC’s warning that stakeholders must avoid actions capable of disrupting the electoral timetable.
As the legal battle shifts back to the Federal High Court in Abuja for substantive hearing, the ADC remains locked in a high-stakes internal struggle—one now complicated by an electoral umpire determined to stay neutral, but increasingly entangled in the fallout of competing legal claims.