Inside ADC’s Turmoil: From Coalition Takeover to Atiku’s 2027 Setback

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) is facing one of the biggest political and legal crises in its recent history following a Federal High Court judgment in Abuja that nullified the leadership of former Senate President David Mark and invalidated decisions taken under his leadership, including the emergence of former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar as the party’s presidential candidate for the 2027 general elections.

Justice Peter Lifu, who delivered the judgment on Thursday, declared the Mark-led caretaker committee illegal, dealing a significant blow to the opposition coalition that had adopted the ADC as its political platform ahead of the 2027 elections.

However, the development did not happen overnight. It is the culmination of a prolonged leadership struggle involving competing claims to the party’s leadership, disagreements over its constitution, court battles and controversies surrounding the role of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

How it all started

Following the 2023 general elections, opposition politicians began exploring ways to unite against the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) ahead of the 2027 elections.

Among the prominent figures involved in the coalition discussions were former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar, former Senate President David Mark, former Labour Party presidential candidate Peter Obi, former Rivers State Governor Rotimi Amaechi, former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai and former Osun State Governor Rauf Aregbesola.

Rather than establish a new political party, the coalition settled on the African Democratic Congress as its political platform.

On July 2, 2025, the coalition was formally unveiled at the Shehu Musa Yar’Adua Centre in Abuja.

At the event, the ADC’s founding National Chairman, Ralph Nwosu, announced that the existing national leadership had agreed to step aside to accommodate the coalition.

David Mark emerged as interim National Chairman, while Rauf Aregbesola became interim National Secretary.

The arrangement was presented as a strategic move to provide the opposition coalition with an established political platform.

However, the leadership transition immediately generated controversy within the party.

Nafiu Bala Gombe challenges David Mark

The major opposition to the new leadership came from Nafiu Bala Gombe, a former National Deputy Chairman of the ADC.

Bala argued that the resignation of Ralph Nwosu and other national executives should have allowed him to assume leadership in accordance with the party’s constitution.

He rejected the process through which David Mark emerged as National Chairman, insisting that the new leadership had not followed the party’s constitutional provisions.

The Mark-led faction, however, maintained that the transition was legitimate and enjoyed the support of the outgoing leadership.

With neither side willing to concede, the disagreement moved from internal party discussions to the courtroom.

September 2, 2025: Bala takes the matter to court

On September 2, 2025, Nafiu Bala instituted a case at the Federal High Court in Abuja, challenging the legitimacy of David Mark’s leadership.

The suit, filed against the ADC, INEC, David Mark, Rauf Aregbesola and Ralph Nwosu, questioned the process through which the new leadership emerged.

Bala sought orders restraining Mark and Aregbesola from parading themselves as National Chairman and National Secretary.

He also challenged decisions taken under the disputed leadership.

The case became the foundation of the legal battle that eventually produced Thursday’s judgment.

INEC recognises David Mark’s leadership

Despite the pending court dispute, INEC initially recognised the Mark-led leadership.

On September 10, 2025, the electoral commission published the names of David Mark and other members of the new national leadership on its website.

This gave the Mark-led faction an important institutional advantage.

However, Bala’s challenge remained before the court, meaning that the legitimacy of the leadership had not been conclusively determined.

The situation became more complicated as other party stakeholders also questioned the coalition’s takeover of the ADC.

Some longstanding members complained that the original party structure was being sidelined by powerful politicians who had recently joined the platform.

March 2026: Court of Appeal intervenes

The leadership dispute took another turn on March 12, 2026, when the Court of Appeal dismissed David Mark’s interlocutory appeal challenging the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court.

The appellate court considered the appeal premature because the substantive case had not yet been determined.

It also directed the parties to maintain the status quo ante bellum pending the determination of the substantive dispute.

The development created uncertainty over the recognition of the competing leadership structures.

April 2026: INEC withdraws recognition

Following the Court of Appeal’s intervention, INEC announced that it would no longer recognise either faction of the ADC pending the determination of the substantive case.

The commission removed the names of David Mark and other members of his leadership from its website.

It also declined to recognise Nafiu Bala as National Chairman.

The development was a major setback for the coalition leadership, whose supporters accused INEC of undermining the opposition.

April 30, 2026: Supreme Court gives Mark temporary relief

David Mark subsequently approached the Supreme Court.

On April 30, 2026, the Supreme Court set aside the Court of Appeal’s status quo ante bellum order and directed the parties to return to the Federal High Court for an expedited hearing of the substantive case.

The decision was welcomed by the Mark-led faction.

INEC subsequently restored the names of Mark and other members of his leadership to its database.

However, an important distinction must be made: the Supreme Court did not finally determine that David Mark was the legitimate National Chairman of the ADC. It directed that the substantive leadership dispute should be heard and resolved by the Federal High Court.

July 2026: Another setback for the Mark-led leadership

The leadership crisis continued when another group of ADC stakeholders challenged the authority of the Mark-led caretaker committee to organise state congresses.

On July 13, 2026, the Court of Appeal upheld restrictions on INEC’s recognition of state congresses organised by committees appointed by the Mark-led leadership.

The ruling further exposed the constitutional difficulties surrounding the caretaker arrangement.

It also demonstrated that the disagreements within the ADC extended beyond the national chairmanship to the control of state party structures.

November 5, 2026: Federal High Court delivers judgment

The prolonged dispute reached a critical turning point on Thursday, November 5, 2026.

Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja nullified the leadership of David Mark, declaring the Mark-led caretaker committee illegal.

The court also invalidated decisions taken under the disputed leadership, including the emergence of Atiku Abubakar as the ADC’s presidential candidate for the 2027 general elections.

The judgment effectively questioned the legal foundation of the party’s preparations for the next general election.

It also affected other decisions and nominations made under the caretaker leadership.

The development represents a significant victory for Nafiu Bala Gombe, who had challenged the leadership arrangement from the beginning.

What happens to Atiku Abubakar’s 2027 ambition?

Perhaps the biggest political implication of the judgment concerns former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar.

Atiku had emerged as the ADC’s presidential candidate through a primary organised under the Mark-led leadership.

The party’s presidential ticket had become a major component of the opposition coalition’s preparations for 2027.

However, with the court invalidating the caretaker leadership and decisions taken under it, Atiku’s emergence as the party’s candidate has suffered a major legal setback.

The immediate implication is that Atiku cannot safely assume that his previous emergence as the ADC flag bearer remains legally valid.

The ADC is expected to challenge the judgment through the appellate process.

Depending on the outcome, the party may have to resolve its leadership crisis, reconsider its nomination process and reorganise its electoral preparations.

It is important to note that an intention to appeal does not automatically suspend or reverse the judgment.

Where does the ADC stand now?

As things stand following Thursday’s judgment, the ADC is confronted with several challenges.

David Mark’s leadership has been nullified by the Federal High Court.

Nafiu Bala Gombe has secured a favourable judgment in his challenge to the leadership arrangement.

Rauf Aregbesola’s position as National Secretary is also affected.

Atiku Abubakar’s emergence as presidential candidate has been invalidated by the judgment.

The party’s other nominations and decisions taken under the disputed caretaker leadership are also affected.

The next major developments will depend on the appeal process, the response of INEC and the party’s ability to resolve its internal leadership dispute.

The judgment does not mean that the ADC as a registered political party has ceased to exist. Rather, it creates a serious question about who has the legitimate authority to control the party and make binding decisions on its behalf.

The bigger political implications

Beyond the immediate battle between David Mark and Nafiu Bala, the ADC crisis raises important questions about the future of opposition politics in Nigeria.

The ADC was presented as a platform capable of uniting opposition politicians and providing a formidable challenge to the APC in 2027.

However, a party struggling to resolve its own leadership disputes faces an uphill task convincing Nigerians that it can provide stable political leadership.

The crisis also demonstrates the importance of respecting party constitutions and internal democratic procedures.

Political alliances may be built around influential personalities and shared electoral interests, but their legitimacy must be established through lawful processes.

For Atiku, the judgment introduces another major uncertainty into his 2027 presidential ambition.

For David Mark, it represents a serious setback to the coalition leadership he helped establish.

For Nafiu Bala, it is a significant legal victory in a dispute that began shortly after the coalition’s entry into the ADC.

And for the Nigerian opposition, it is another reminder that unity cannot be sustained by political calculations alone.

A coalition in search of a political future

The ADC leadership crisis is far from over.

Although the Federal High Court has delivered its judgment, the proposed appeal means that the legal battle may continue.

The coming days will be crucial in determining whether David Mark and his associates can overturn the decision, whether Nafiu Bala can establish a recognised leadership structure, and whether the opposition coalition can salvage its 2027 electoral plans.

What began as an ambitious attempt to unite Nigeria’s opposition politicians has become a major battle over party ownership, constitutional authority and political survival.

The central lesson is that the struggle for political power must be accompanied by respect for the rules governing how that power is acquired and exercised.

The ADC went looking for a platform to challenge the ruling party in 2027. It now finds itself fighting to establish who legitimately controls the platform.