INEC Places Atiku’s ADC Ticket In Court’s Hands Ahead Of 2027

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has said it will rely on judicial decisions in determining the status of former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar’s political candidacy under the African Democratic Congress (ADC), leaving the disputed party leadership and nomination process to be resolved through the courts.

Speaking on Thursday during a dialogue at Chatham House in London, organised in partnership with the Kimpact Development Initiative, INEC Chairman, Professor Joash Amupitan, said the commission was constitutionally bound to implement court orders, particularly decisions of the Supreme Court.

Responding to a question on whether Atiku could contest under the ADC if the judgment against the leadership led by former Senate President David Mark remained in force, Amupitan said the commission would have to comply with the final outcome of the legal process.

He explained that INEC could face public criticism when implementing politically sensitive court decisions, but maintained that the commission could not ignore judicial orders.

The position places the responsibility for determining the disputed candidacy on the courts rather than INEC, which has repeatedly said it would not take action contrary to a valid court directive.

The controversy followed a November 5 judgment by Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja, which nullified the emergence of the Mark-led ADC leadership and invalidated decisions taken by the disputed executive.

The court also restrained INEC from recognising or acting on decisions reached at the party’s 99th National Executive Committee meeting held on July 27, 2025. The ruling has raised questions about the validity of the process that produced Atiku as the ADC’s presidential candidate.

The suit was filed by Nafiu Bala Gombe, a former ADC Deputy National Chairman, who challenged the party’s leadership arrangement following the resignation of former National Chairman Ralph Nwosu and other party officials.

The ADC has rejected the judgment and indicated its intention to challenge it at the Court of Appeal. The party’s National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, has maintained that Bala voluntarily resigned from his position, arguing that the party possesses his resignation letter.

However, Justice Lifu ruled that the document presented did not provide reliable evidence of Bala’s voluntary resignation.

Atiku has also maintained that he remains in the 2027 presidential race despite the judgment, while the party’s appeal is expected to determine the next stage of the dispute.

Beyond the ADC crisis, Amupitan expressed concern about the growing number of election-related cases involving INEC. He disclosed that more than 300 cases were pending against the commission, with approximately 66 days remaining before the scheduled 2027 elections.

He said the volume of litigation could complicate preparations, particularly as INEC had already commenced procurement of sensitive election materials.

The chairman recalled that when the ADC leadership dispute emerged in April, the commission had advocated that it should be resolved within three weeks to avoid prolonged uncertainty.

Amupitan also called for reforms requiring pre-election disputes to be concluded between six months and one year before polling. He argued that early resolution would give INEC sufficient time to concentrate on logistics, procurement and other operational responsibilities.

The latest comments therefore extend beyond Atiku’s political ambition, highlighting the growing pressure that pre-election litigation places on the electoral commission as preparations for the 2027 polls continue.

For now, Atiku’s position on the ADC platform remains tied to the outcome of the ongoing legal battle. INEC has made clear that its eventual action will be determined by the applicable court orders, not political arguments surrounding the dispute.