Barely hours after a Supreme Court ruling restored the leadership of former Senate President, David Mark, as National Chairman of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), the party is facing renewed uncertainty following a push by the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) to deregister political parties without electoral representation.

The AGF and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), told a Federal High Court in Abuja that it is unconstitutional to retain political parties that have failed to secure any elective seats.

Fagbemi made the submission in response to a suit instituted by the National Forum of Former Legislators (NFFL), which is seeking the deregistration of several parties, including the ADC, Action Alliance (AA), Accord Party, Zenith Labour Party, and Action Peoples Party (APP).

Anchoring his argument on Section 225A of the Constitution, the AGF maintained that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) lacks the discretion to sustain the registration of political parties that fail to meet prescribed performance thresholds.

He argued that the continued existence of such parties not only bloats ballot papers but also strains public resources, complicates electoral administration, and undermines constitutional intent.

According to him, the provision was introduced through the Fourth Alteration to address ballot congestion and improve electoral efficiency.

Fagbemi further underscored his role as the chief law officer of the federation, with a duty to ensure strict compliance with constitutional provisions, including initiating or supporting legal actions where necessary.

Earlier, counsel to the NFFL, Yakubu Ruba (SAN), told the court that the suit is purely for constitutional interpretation, seeking clarity on the legality of retaining parties that allegedly fall short of statutory requirements.

In an affidavit deposed to by the forum’s Board of Trustees Chairman and National Coordinator, Nnanna Igbokwe, the plaintiffs contended that the affected parties have failed to win any elective offices at all levels of government — from presidential to councillorship positions.

They also alleged that the parties did not meet the constitutional benchmark of securing at least 25 per cent of votes in any state during presidential elections, nor demonstrated sufficient national spread across wards, local government areas, and states.

The forum warned that, unless the court intervenes, INEC may allow the parties to participate in the 2027 general elections, a move it said could further congest ballot papers and mislead voters.

The development signals fresh legal and political headwinds for the ADC, despite its recent reprieve at the Supreme Court, which affirmed the legitimacy of the Mark-led National Executive.

The Supreme Court on Thursday voided the order of the Court of Appeal that led to the derecognition of former Senate President, David Mark, as National Chairman of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

In a unanimous judgment, the apex court held that the preservative order issued by the appellate court was made in bad faith and was both unnecessary and improper.

Delivering the lead judgment, Justice Mohammed Lawal Garba ruled that the Court of Appeal acted outside its bounds by granting an order that was neither sought nor canvassed by any of the parties in the suit.

The disputed order of status quo ante bellum, earlier issued by the Court of Appeal, had formed the basis upon which the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) declined to recognise the Mark-led National Executive Committee of the party.

By vacating the order, the Supreme Court effectively restored Mark and other members of the ADC National Executive as the legitimate leadership of the party, directing INEC to accord them due recognition.

The ruling is expected to have far-reaching implications for the ongoing leadership tussle within the ADC, bringing clarity to the party’s national structure.

Fresh cracks have widened within the political establishment in Rivers State as the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike, is said to have endorsed a slate of candidates ahead of the 2027 general elections, in what observers interpret as a decisive move to reassert control over the state’s political structure.

Multiple party sources disclosed that Wike has thrown his weight behind the member representing Obio/Akpor Federal Constituency, Kingsley Chinda, as the preferred governorship candidate on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). Chinda, a ranking lawmaker and prominent voice within the PDP caucus in the House of Representatives, is reportedly set to obtain his nomination form imminently.

The endorsement is particularly significant given Chinda’s stance during the recent wave of defections that hit the PDP, as he remained within the party while several colleagues aligned elsewhere. His positioning, insiders say, reflects both loyalty to the party and alignment with Wike’s political bloc.

In the same vein, the former Rivers governor is also said to have endorsed former PDP state chairman, Felix Obuah, alongside former National Assembly members Olaka Nwogu and Allwell Onyesoh for senatorial contests across the state. Two of the candidates will run under the APC

Sources within the circle also disclosed that a young candidate has been endorsed to replace Hon. Chinda in the House of Representatives.

It is not yet clear if the members of the state House of Assembly who defected to the APC will defect back to the PDP to enhance their chances of returning as lawmakers in 2027.

The development underscores an intensifying rift between Wike and his successor, Governor Siminalayi Fubara, whose administration has in recent months faced mounting political pressure from factions loyal to the FCT minister.

Though both men emerged from the same political structure, their relationship has deteriorated amid disagreements over control of party machinery, governance style, and the broader political direction of Rivers State. The latest endorsements are widely viewed as Wike’s clearest signal yet that he is charting an independent course ahead of 2027.

Sources within the PDP suggest that the move effectively formalises a parallel power structure, with Wike consolidating influence through loyalists positioned for key elective offices. “This is beyond consultation; it is a declaration,” a senior party figure said, noting that the endorsements could trigger a fresh round of alignments and counter-alignments within the state.

Analysts say the choice of Chinda is strategic. As a federal lawmaker with deep roots in Obio/Akpor, Wike’s political stronghold, his candidacy could help retain grassroots support while appealing to the legislative bloc within the PDP. Similarly, the senatorial endorsements reflect a blend of experience and longstanding loyalty to Wike’s camp.

However, the development raises questions about the cohesion of the PDP in Rivers, a state long regarded as one of its strongest bastions. With competing centres of authority emerging, the likelihood of internal contests, parallel congresses, or even defections cannot be ruled out.

While official declarations are yet to be made, the endorsements have already altered the political calculations ahead of the next election cycle. For Governor Fubara, the challenge will be to consolidate his own base and assert control over party structures. For Wike, the move appears aimed at sustaining relevance and influence in Rivers politics despite his current role at the federal level.

As the 2027 race gradually takes shape, Rivers State once again appears set for a high-stakes political contest, with the PDP’s internal dynamics likely to play a decisive role in determining its outcome.

Fresh turmoil has engulfed the African Democratic Congress (ADC) following a Federal High Court judgment restraining the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising or participating in state congresses organised by committees set up by the party’s caretaker leadership.

Delivering judgment in Abuja on Wednesday, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik ruled that the authority to conduct state congresses resides exclusively with the party’s state executive committees, not the national leadership.

The court further affirmed that the four-year tenure of the ADC’s State Working Committees and State Executive Committees remains valid and subsisting, pending the conduct of duly constituted congresses and the convening of a national convention.
In a decision that underscores deepening divisions within the party, the court held that neither the Constitution of Nigeria nor the ADC constitution empowers the caretaker/interim National Working Committee, led by David Mark, to appoint committees to conduct state congresses.

The suit (FHC/ABJ/CS/581/2026) was instituted by Don Norman Obinna, Johnny Tovie Derek, Obah C. Ehigiator, Hon. Olona Yinka, Dr. Charles Idowu Omideji, Samuel Pam Gyang, and Obianyo Patrick, on behalf of ADC state chairmen and executive committees nationwide.

Joined as defendants are the ADC, Mark, Patricia Akwashiki, Bolaji Abdullahi, Rauf Aregbesola, Prof. Oserheimen Osunbor, and INEC.

The judge framed the central issue as whether the second to sixth defendants, including Mark, had the constitutional or statutory authority to assume the powers of elected state organs of the ADC, whose tenure is guaranteed under the party’s constitution.

She relied on section 223 of the 1999 Constitution, which mandates political parties to conduct periodic elections based on democratic principles, as well as Article 23 of the ADC Constitution, which provides that national and state officers shall hold office for a maximum of two terms spanning eight years.

According to her, “the question is whether there is any infraction committed by Mr Mark and co-defendants when they convened meetings and appointed a body known as a congress committee to organise state congresses.”

On the defence raised by the defendants that the matter was an internal affair of a political party and therefore outside the jurisdiction of the court, the judge acknowledged the settled legal position but clarified its limits.

She held that while courts are generally reluctant to interfere in internal party matters, they will intervene where there is a clear allegation of violation of constitutional or statutory provisions.

“The law is settled that courts will not interfere. However, where there is an allegation of breach of constitutional or statutory provisions, the court has a duty to intervene,” she ruled.

“Where a party alleges that its constitution has been violated, the court is bound to adjudicate. Any argument that this court lacks jurisdiction on that basis fails,” she added.

Justice Abdulmalik stressed that political parties must operate strictly within the confines of their constitutions, noting that any deviation from prescribed procedures, particularly in leadership matters, cannot be justified under the guise of internal autonomy.

She found that the procedure adopted by the defendants, including the appointment of a “congress committee,” was not recognised by the ADC constitution and therefore invalid.

Consequently, the court held that the tenure of the state executive committees remains valid and must be allowed to run its full course without interference.
The judge further ruled that only those elected structures have the authority to organise state congresses, effectively nullifying any process initiated by the caretaker leadership.

The plaintiffs had challenged the legality of the caretaker committee’s decision to constitute a congress committee for the April 2026 state congresses, arguing that such moves violate the party’s constitution.

Justice Abdulmalik’s ruling effectively halts the planned congresses under the Mark-led leadership, further compounding internal wrangling within the ADC and casting uncertainty over the party’s organisational cohesion ahead of future political activities.