A deepening leadership crisis within the African Democratic Congress (ADC) has thrown the party’s preparations for the 2027 elections into fresh uncertainty after a rival faction asked the courts to halt the sale of presidential nomination forms.
The faction led by Nafiu Bala warned aspirants seeking to contest under the party’s platform that they risked invalidation if they continued purchasing expression of interest and nomination forms while a leadership dispute remained before the courts.
The intervention came as the Federal High Court in Abuja adjourned indefinitely the substantive suit filed by Bala after the plaintiff requested that the case be reassigned to another judge.
In a statement issued on Friday, the Secretary of the ADC Board of Trustees, Rufus Akanmi, said the suspension of the nomination process formed part of resolutions reached during a BoT meeting held on Thursday.
“All parties concerned are directed to immediately suspend the sale/purchase of such forms pending the final determination of the matter presently before the Federal High Court,” Akanmi said.
“It is expressly stated that any person who proceeds to purchase the said forms does so at their own risk.”
The development marks the latest twist in a widening struggle for control of the opposition party, which has recently attracted heavyweight political figures including Atiku Abubakar and Rotimi Amaechi ahead of the 2027 elections.
The Bala faction also praised a recent Supreme Court ruling delivered on 30 April, describing it as a victory for constitutional democracy and internal party legality.
Akanmi urged members aligned with the coalition bloc and the camp associated with David Mark to cooperate with what he described as the “Gombe-led leadership” in the interest of party unity.
According to him, collaboration was necessary to ensure the party’s effective participation in the coming general elections and to guarantee credible candidates at all levels.
The Board of Trustees further directed the National Working Committee to establish caretaker committees in states where the tenure of party executives had expired, while also calling for a mini national convention to fill vacant positions created by recent resignations within the party hierarchy.
But the political dispute quickly returned to the courtroom on Friday, where proceedings before Justice Emeka Nwite descended into procedural arguments and accusations of judicial manoeuvring.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, had previously been delayed after an interlocutory appeal filed by David Mark reached the Supreme Court.
Counsel to the plaintiff, Luka Musa Haruna, informed the court that the Supreme Court had dismissed the interlocutory appeal on 30 April for lacking merit and had lifted an earlier stay of proceedings imposed by the Court of Appeal.
Haruna, however, disclosed that the plaintiff had also submitted a letter to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court requesting the transfer of the case to another judge, asking the court to await an administrative decision before proceeding further.
The application triggered sharp objections from defence lawyers, who accused the plaintiff of attempting to frustrate the accelerated hearing earlier ordered by the appellate courts.
Counsel for the first defendant, Realwan Okpanachi, argued that the plaintiff had misrepresented the Supreme Court ruling and described the transfer request as an ambush.
“We also consider it as an attempt to frustrate the order of accelerated hearing granted by the Court of Appeal and upheld by the Supreme Court,” he said.
Another defence lawyer, Sulaiman Usman, accused the plaintiff of engaging in “forum shopping and judge shopping”, arguing that the move risked undermining confidence in the judicial process.
Counsel for the fifth defendant, P.I. Oyewole, went further, describing the application as an invitation to “judicial rascality”.
Responding to the arguments, Justice Nwite ruled that the court could not act on a letter addressed to the Chief Judge without hearing all parties involved.
“Taking a decision or any action in such a letter without hearing from the defendants will amount to breach of their fundamental right in this suit,” the judge said.
He subsequently adjourned the matter indefinitely to allow parties file a certified true copy of the Supreme Court judgment, serve all parties with the transfer application, and await further directives from the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court.
