By Duchess Ifeoluwa 

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has described the Federal High Court judgment nullifying the Senator David Mark-led leadership of the party and invalidating the candidacy of former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar as a desperate attempt to cripple the opposition and deny Nigerians the right to freely choose their leaders in the 2027 general elections.

The party alleged that the timing of the judgment, delivered by Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court, Abuja, barely 24 hours after a massive turnout at its presidential campaign rally in Sokoto, exposed what it called the growing desperation of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC).

In a statement signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, the ADC said it had reasons to believe that the judgment had been prepared long before its delivery, alleging that the Sokoto rally merely triggered its release.

The party said Nigerians had turned out in large numbers at the rally to demonstrate their support for the ADC and its promise to make life affordable, only to be confronted with a judgment that could invalidate the party’s leadership and candidates across different levels of government.

Questioning the implications of the ruling, the ADC argued that the dispute went beyond the political fortunes of Atiku and Mark, insisting that it concerned the democratic rights of Nigerians and thousands of candidates seeking elective positions at the local, state and federal levels.

The party described the judgment as legally indefensible and vowed to challenge it through every available judicial process.

It anchored its objection on an earlier judgment delivered by Justice Musa Liman of the same Federal High Court on July 2, 2026, in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1637/2025, which it said affirmed the legitimacy of the David Mark-led National Working Committee (NWC) and directed the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to recognise the leadership.

According to the ADC, it is a settled principle of Nigerian jurisprudence that a court of coordinate jurisdiction cannot sit on appeal over, review, vary or nullify the subsisting judgment of another court of equal jurisdiction.

The party consequently rejected what it described as consequential orders founded on a determination that appeared to disregard the principle, while disclosing that it was awaiting the Certified True Copy of the latest judgment to establish its precise terms, scope and operative orders.

The ADC also accused the APC of resorting to judicial controversies whenever the opposition appeared to be gaining political momentum, alleging that the development was part of an attempt to undermine its growing support ahead of the 2027 elections.

Warning against what it described as a dangerous attempt to eliminate political competition through the courts, the party cautioned the ruling party against actions capable of threatening the peace and stability of the country.

It maintained that Nigeria belonged to its citizens and not any political party, adding that the presidency was not an inheritance and that the ruling party should be prepared to submit itself to a free and fair electoral contest.

The ADC also appealed to the judiciary not to allow itself to be used to impose what it described as dictatorship on the country, insisting that the dispute was not merely about the party or its presidential candidate but the future of Nigeria’s democracy.

The party urged its members nationwide to remain calm and law-abiding while it pursues all available legal avenues to challenge the judgment.