Court ruling overtaken by events, Atiku remains presidential candidate, ADC campaign council says

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) Presidential Campaign Council has insisted that former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar remains its presidential candidate for the 2027 general elections despite Thursday’s Federal High Court judgment nullifying his nomination and the leadership of Senator David Mark.

The judgment, delivered by Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court, Abuja, followed a suit filed by Nafiu Bala Gombe, a former Deputy National Chairman of the ADC, challenging the emergence of the Mark-led leadership. The court nullified the leadership structure and its decisions, including the process that produced Atiku as the party’s presidential candidate and the nominations of other ADC candidates.

Reacting to the judgment, the ADC campaign council described it as an “academic exercise that has been overtaken by events”, insisting that it could not override an earlier judgment delivered by a court of coordinate jurisdiction on the same subject matter.

The position was contained in a statement signed by Kola Ologbondiyan, Director of Media and Publicity of the ADC Presidential Campaign Council.

“The Council maintains that the judgment is of no practical effect and cannot override or displace an existing judgment of a court of coordinate jurisdiction on the same subject matter,” the statement said.

The council recalled that Justice Musa Liman of the same Federal High Court had earlier examined the circumstances surrounding the emergence of Mark as national chairman and Rauf Aregbesola as national secretary.

According to the ADC PCC, Justice Liman held that the transfer of leadership from former chairman Ralph Nwosu to Mark did not violate the party’s constitution.

It said the earlier judgment recognised the July 2, 2025 meeting as a stakeholders’ meeting which preceded the July 29, 2025 National Executive Council meeting where Mark and Aregbesola emerged as national chairman and national secretary respectively.

The council added that the NEC meeting was monitored by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), arguing that the leadership dispute had already been subjected to judicial scrutiny.

“The legal implications of that judgment cannot be wished away. The leadership question has already been subjected to judicial scrutiny by a court of coordinate jurisdiction,” it said.