***Awards N10m cost against party

***Judgment won’t affect ADC candidates, party insists

***Atiku heads to S’Court, alleges forged INEC documents over ‘fake’ nomination upload

By Ikechukwu Nnochiri, Omeiza Ajayi & Luminous Jannamike

ABUJA — In a split decision of two-to-one, the Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja yesterday affirmed the judgment restraining the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, from recognising or participating in any state congresses organised by committees appointed by the Senator David Mark-led caretaker leadership of African Democratic Congress, ADC.

But the party in a swift reaction, insisted the judgment does not affect candidates produced through the party’s direct primaries.

Efforts to get INEC’s reaction to the judgement at press time, however, proved abortive as telephone calls and messages sent to the spokesman of the commission were not replied.

However, a three-member panel of the appellate court, in a lead verdict delivered by Justice Okon Abang, said it found no reason to set aside the restraining order the Federal High Court in Abuja had issued against the Mark-led ADC on April 29.

It further upheld the order of trial Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, which restrained the Mark-led executives from interfering with the tenure and functions of the party’s elected state executives.

The appellate court concurred that responsibility for conducting state congresses of political parties rested with elected state executive committees, not with the national leadership.

While Justices Abang and Donatus Okorowo gave the majority verdict barring the electoral body from acknowledging the outcome of congresses held by the Mark-led leadership of the ADC, the head of the appellate court’s panel, Justice Abba Mohammed, gave a dissenting judgment.

Minority decision

In his minority decision, Justice Mohammed held that the case that precipitated the restraining order bordered on a non-justiciable internal affair of a political party.

He held that the trial court was wrong to have assumed jurisdiction to entertain the matter. 

Meanwhile, the Court of Appeal judgment may jeopardise the presidential candidacy of former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and other candidates who emerged through the national congress organised by the Mark-led faction of the ADC, ahead of the 2027 general elections.

Recall that the High Court had, in its judgment, held that the four-year tenure of the ADC’s State Working Committees and State Executive Committees remain valid and subsisting, pending conduct of properly constituted congresses and the convocation of a national convention.

The judgment followed a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/581/2026, lodged before the court by aggrieved members of the ADC.

Those behind the suit are Don Norman Obinna, Johnny Tovie Derek, Obah C. Ehigiator, Hon. Olona Yinka, Dr. Charles Idowu Omideji, Samuel Pam Gyang, and Obianyo Patrick, who told the court that they sued for themselves and on behalf of all State Chairmen and State Executive Committees of the African Democratic Congress, ADC.

Listed as defendants in the matter are the ADC; Sen. David Mark; Sen. Patricia Akwashiki; Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi; Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola; and Prof. Oserheimen Osunbor (sued on behalf of the Caretaker/Interim National Working Committee); and INEC.

The plaintiffs had, among other things, challenged the decision of the Senator Mark-led leadership of the ADC to constitute committees for the purpose of conducting state congresses.

They challenged the validity of appointments made by the Mark-led caretaker committee, arguing that planned state congresses slated for April 2026, if conducted under the supervision of the said caretaker committee, would constitute a gross violation of the party’s constitution.

It was further the position of the plaintiffs that only duly elected party organs recognised under the party’s constitution possessed the power to conduct congresses.

While agreeing with the plaintiffs, Justice Abdulmalik held that neither the 1999 Constitution, as amended, nor the Constitution of the ADC empowered the caretaker/interim National Working Committee, led by Senator Mark, to appoint committees for the purpose of conducting state congresses.

The court held that the claims brought before it by the plaintiffs were valid and deserving of judicial consideration, citing alleged breach of constitutional and statutory provisions.

It held that Section 223 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, mandates political parties to conduct periodic elections based on democratic principles, adding that Article 23 of the ADC Constitution also provides that national and state officers shall hold office for a maximum of two terms spanning eight years.

Justice Abdulmalik stressed that although courts were generally reluctant to interfere in the domestic affairs of political parties, they nonetheless intervened where there was a clear allegation of violation of constitutional or statutory provisions.

She held that evidence before the court established that the tenure of the state executive committees of the ADC remain valid and must be allowed to run its full course without interference.

The court stressed that only those elected structures havd the authority to organise state congresses, and it accordingly nullified any process initiated by the Senator Mark-led caretaker leadership.

Earlier, the court dismissed a preliminary objection filed by the defendants challenging the competence of the suit and the court’s jurisdiction to entertain it.

It held that the subject matter of the plaintiffs’ action pertained to the affairs of INEC and, therefore, fell within the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court under Section 251 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.

The court also waved aside the defendants’ contention that the plaintiffs failed to exhaust internal dispute resolution mechanisms before instituting the action.

It held that the plaintiffs had the requisite locus standi (legal right) to file the suit. 

The appellate court, while upholding the restraining order, said it had a duty to intervene so as to “prevent anarchy and ensure the survival of democracy in Nigeria.”

It cited a recent Supreme Court judgment in the leadership crisis rocking the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, to hold that the ADC case could not be classified as a domestic affair of a political party.

“Once a complaint before the court is anchored on a constitutional infraction, the shield of internal affairs drops and the veil is lifted for judicial intervention,” Justice Abang added in the majority judgment. 

Consequently, the panel dismissed the appeal marked CA/ABJ/CV/608/2026, which the ADC lodged in order to set aside the high court judgment. 

It held that congresses and the national convention conducted by the Mark-led ADC amounted to a nullity as they were held in disobedience to a subsisting order the high court made on April 14.

Having resolved the case against the ADC, the appellate court awarded a cost of N10million against the party. 

Shortly after the judgment, the ADC, which was represented by its National Welfare Secretary, Mr. Nkem Ukandu, said the party would take the case before the Supreme Court.

Appeal Court judgment won’t affect ADC candidates, party insists

Reacting to the judgment, African Democratic Congress, ADC, insisted it would not affect candidates produced through the party’s direct primaries.

It maintained that the decision has no bearing on candidates who emerged through its direct primary process.

ADC National Publicity Secretary, Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, who stated this in an interview with Vanguard yesterday, said the opposition party sought to allay concerns over the implication of the judgment on its electoral preparations.

“We wish to assure members of the party and the general public that this judgment has no effect whatsoever on the direct primaries through which the party’s candidates have emerged at all levels,” Abdullahi said.

He said the party had already commenced legal steps to challenge the judgment, describing the decision as one it could not accept.

“The party has already commenced the process of appealing the judgment, which we respectfully disagree with and consider to be legally unsustainable,” he stated.

He also drew attention to the dissenting opinion of the presiding Justice, saying it aligned with the party’s understanding of the law.

“We also note the dissenting judgment of the presiding Justice, which, in our view, more accurately reflects the settled position of the law and the party’s position,” the spokesman added.

As the legal process unfolds, the party urged its members and supporters not to be distracted by the court action.

“We urge all party members and the millions of our supporters to remain calm, confident and focused,” Abdullahi said.

While noting that the party remained committed to pursuing its political agenda, despite the litigation, Abdullahi said: “African Democratic Congress remains committed to the task of providing Nigerians with a credible alternative and will continue to pursue that mission in accordance with the Constitution and the rule of law.’’

Atiku heads to S-CourtAlso reacting yesterday, presidential candidate of the party, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, said his legal team had been instructed to approach the Supreme Court for a definitive determination of the issues arising from a recent Court of Appeal judgment, even as he insisted that his presidential bid remains on track despite the judgment.

Speaking through his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, in Abuja yesterday, Atiku urged party members and millions of Nigerians yearning for genuine democratic change to remain calm, resolute and focused.

According to him, contrary to misleading narratives being aggressively circulated in some quarters, the Court of Appeal did not invalidate the ADC’s primary elections conducted for the nomination of candidates for the 2027 general elections.

“Those celebrating today should celebrate with caution. Those attempting to sell false hope to their supporters should remember that political propaganda can never substitute for judicial pronouncements,” he said.

Atiku explained that the judgment being celebrated by his opponents related only to the conduct of state congresses and the tenure of State Executive Committees, and did not, from facts available, amount to a judicial nullification of the ADC’s primary elections conducted under the Electoral Act.

He said: “There is a world of legal difference between the election of party executives through internal congresses and nomination of candidates through statutory primary elections. 

‘’They are distinct legal exercises, governed by different legal principles and serving different constitutional purposes. One should not be confused with the other.”

According to him, it is a settled principle of law that courts determine only the issues submitted before them, adding that any attempt to stretch the judgment beyond its proper scope was “an invitation to legal absurdity.”

ADC alleges forged INEC documents over ‘fake’ nomination upload

Meanwhile, the party has accused a group, led by Nafiu Bala Gombe, of allegedly using forged documents purportedly issued by INEC, to falsely claim it uploaded the names of a presidential candidate and other nominees to the commission’s nomination portal.

The party asked INEC to investigate what it described as the forgery and unauthorised use of the documents, saying the development was capable of creating confusion and undermining public confidence in the electoral body.

In a statement by Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, the ADC dismissed the reported upload as false, insisting that only the leadership recognised by INEC had access to the commission’s nomination portal.

“We are also, by this statement, formally drawing the attention of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, to what appears to be the forgery and unauthorised use of documents purportedly emanating from the commission in a manner capable of creating confusion and undermining public confidence in its integrity and reputation as Nigeria’s electoral umpire. 

‘’We trust that the commission will investigate this matter and take the necessary steps to correct this blatant misrepresentation,” Abdullahi said.

The party said the claim did not stand up to scrutiny, arguing that INEC neither granted access to its nomination portal nor issued nomination codes to any leadership it didn’t recognise.

“INEC does not issue nomination portal access or nomination codes to a leadership it does not recognise. Secondly, the Commission will not issue two codes to the same party. Otherwise, every impostor would simply upload names to the portal and proclaim themselves the authentic leadership of a political party. That is plainly not how the law or the Commission’s processes work,” ADC said.  While also challenging those behind the claim to produce proof, the party stated: “The question, therefore, is straightforward: where is the evidence of this purported upload by a group of individuals not known by law or the electoral body?”

The ADC described the report as another attempt to create confusion, saying “even as ridiculous as this claim appears, it is nothing more than another scheme to create doubts and confusion in the minds of unsuspecting members of the public.’’

‘No leadership dispute in ADC’

Maintaining that there was no leadership dispute within the party, the ADC said the leadership recognised by INEC had concluded its nomination process in line with the Electoral Act and the commission’s guidelines.

The party also reaffirmed that the names of its presidential and vice-presidential candidates had already been submitted to the electoral commission.

“As we informed the public last week, the details of our Presidential Candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, and our Vice-Presidential Candidate, Rotimi Amaechi, have been uploaded on the INEC portal. Those are the facts,” Abdullahi said. 

Looking ahead to the 2027 general election, ADC said it expected more attempts to distract the party but insisted it would remain focused on offering Nigerians what it described as a credible alternative.

“As the election approaches, there will be repeated attempts to distract the party and mislead the public. We will not be distracted. Our focus remains firmly on presenting Nigerians with a credible alternative that can restore security, tackle the rising cost of living, revive the economy, create jobs, and return the country to the path of progress in 2027,” Abdullahi said. 

The party urged its members, supporters, the media and the general public to ignore what it described as ‘agents of distraction’ and rely only on official communications issued through its authorised channels.

•Nigeria not a lab for policy experiments — Atiku

•Suspension of hike in fees, victory for the people — Peter Obi

By Joseph Erunke, Omeiza Ajayi & Elizabeth Osayande

Former Vice President and presidential candidate of African Democratic Congress, ADC, Atiku Abubakar, and his Nigeria Democratic Congress, ADC, counterpart, Peter Obi, in the 2027 elections yesterday, expressed excitement over the decision of the Federal Government to suspend the proposed review of registration fees for the 2027 West African Senior School Certificate Examinations, WASSCE, and National Examinations Council, NECO, Senior School Certificate Examinations, SSCE.

Recall that the government had on Sunday, announced the increment of WAEC fees from N27,000 to N50,000 and NECO from N30,000 to same N50,000.

The proposed fee review drew very strong condemnations from stakeholders in the Nigerian project, including Atiku Abubakar and the National Parents Teachers Association of Nigeria, NAPTAN.

Announcing the suspension yesterday, the Federal Ministry of Education, said the proposed adjustment in fees was being suspended, pending a comprehensive review of the policy.

The ministry, in a statement by its Director, Press and Public Relations, Boriowo Folasade, explained that the decision followed reactions from Nigerians over the planned increase, adding that  it had taken note of the public’s concerns and constructive feedback on the matter.

According to the ministry, the proposed fee review was initially driven by the country’s economic realities and the escalating cost of organising credible national examinations.

It explained that examination registration fees had remained largely unchanged for several years, despite rising operational expenses, including logistics, security, printing of examination materials, deployment of technology, quality assurance and other critical services required to preserve the integrity of public examinations.

However, the Minister of Education, Dr. Maruf Tunji Alausa, directed that the proposal was being suspended in line with the federal government’s commitment to inclusive, transparent and evidence-based policymaking.

The ministry said the decision reflected its determination to ensure that policies affecting millions of students and their families were subjected to broad consultation and carefully weighed before implementation.

“As part of the fresh review process, the Ministry will engage extensively with examination bodies, state ministries of education, school proprietors and administrators, parents’ associations, organised labour, education stakeholders and other critical partners,” the ministry said.

It added that the consultations would ensure that any future decision on examination fees was fair, sustainable, transparent and responsive to prevailing economic realities while protecting access to education.

The ministry stressed that the proposed increase would not take effect until the consultation process was concluded and a final decision reached.

Reassuring Nigerians of the government’s commitment to education, the ministry said the welfare of students, equitable access to quality education and responsible policymaking remained central to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s Renewed Hope Agenda for the education sector.

It also thanked parents, students and other stakeholders for their understanding, patience and continued support, pledging to keep the public informed throughout the consultation process.

Nigeria not a lab for policy experiments – Atiku

Reacting to the suspension of the proposed hike yesterday, ADC presidential candidate in the 2027 elections, Atiku Abubakar, welcomed the federal government’s decision to suspend the proposed increase but declared that Nigeria would not continue to be governed as a laboratory for reckless policy experiments. 

In a statement issued by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, in Abuja, the former vice president described the reversal as a victory for millions of Nigerian parents, students, civil society organisations and citizens who refused to remain silent in the face of what he called an unjust policy.

According to him, the decision vindicates the concerns he had earlier raised that pricing public examinations beyond the reach of ordinary Nigerians will deepen educational inequality, worsen the out-of-school children crisis and deny countless brilliant but indigent students the opportunity to pursue higher education.

“The suspension is welcome, but it also raises an uncomfortable question: why must this government always wait for public outrage before correcting policies that should never have been conceived in the first place. 

“Governing is not a laboratory for reckless experimentation. Sound governments consult before they decide, not after Nigerians have been subjected to needless anxiety and uncertainty,” he said. 

Atiku said it was becoming a disturbing pattern for the administration to announce harsh policies with little evidence of meaningful consultation, only to retreat when confronted by overwhelming public opposition, adding that such conduct does not amount to responsive governance but reflected poor policy formulation.

Suspension of WAEC/NECO exam fees, victory for the people – Peter Obi

On his part, the presidential candidate of NDC, Peter Obi, described the suspension as “a victory for the Nigerian people.”

Obi, who stated this in a post on his official X handle where he commended the government for listening to public outcry yesterday, stressed that the focus should have been on increased investment in basic education, rather than fee increments.

“I received the welcome news of the suspension of the newly introduced examination fees with relief. This is a victory for the Nigerian people.

“While I commend the authorities for listening to the widespread public outcry and suspending the policy, it must be said that the fee was an unnecessary burden that should never have been introduced at this time of great hardship, when we should be doing everything possible to invest in basic education and reduce the millions of out-of-school children in Nigeria.

“Education is a fundamental right and a public good, not a source of government revenue,” and called for the reversal of other “anti-people policies. I thank the citizens, parents, and advocacy groups whose voices made this reversal possible,” Obi wrote.

Indigenes of Osun State in the diaspora, under the auspices of the Osun Development Association (ODA), have declared that the governorship candidates of political parties contesting in the forthcoming election in the state will sign a peace accord ahead of the poll.

ODA noted that this is necessary in view of the prevailing situation in the state and to prevent a breakdown of law and order.

The group explained that the current governor and Accord candidate, Senator Ademola Adeleke; the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate, Mr Bola Oyebamiji; the Action Alliance candidate, Olanrewaju Farinloye; the African Democratic Congress (ADC) candidate, Najeem Salaam; the African Action Congress (AAC) candidate, Esan Olajide; and other candidates will sign the peace pact.

Chairman of ODA’s Leadership and Governance Committee, Dr Tunji Olugbodi, made the declaration in a statement heralding the planned summit where candidates of the political parties will sign the peace accord to prevent violence before, during and after the election.

Olugbodi, in the statement made available to DAILY POST on Monday evening, explained that the state is currently at a critical democratic crossroads.

He said the summit, with the theme, “Speak, Choose, Hold Accountable: Citizens at the Centre of Osun’s Democracy,” is billed to take place in Osogbo because it is necessary to commit all the major stakeholders to a peaceful electoral process.

Olugbodi added that the group believes the state can set a national benchmark for peaceful, credible elections.

The summit is expected to bring all stakeholders in the electoral process under one roof to chart a way forward in order to prevent any uncertainty before, during and after the election.

Olugbodi said, “Osun State is at a critical democratic crossroads. The Osun Development Association (ODA) has finalised arrangements to host the Osun 2026 Democratic Governance, Peace and Electoral Integrity Summit, a high-level civic intervention designed to steer the state’s political discourse toward issue-based campaigning and away from rising tension ahead of the August governorship election.”

ODA Chairman, Dr Segun Aina, in his contribution, noted that the collective participation of all stakeholders is necessary for the forthcoming election.