ADC: An Opposition At War With Itself
By Sola Adeola
Beyond the Headlines. Beneath the Surface.
Governance | Security | Criminology | Public Policy | Strategic Communication
Tel: 08033141980 [email protected]
The African Democratic Congress (ADC) appears to have discovered a rather unusual way of preparing for the 2027 presidential election: fighting over who is qualified to lead the party before deciding how to lead Nigeria.
If this were not a serious political matter, it would make for excellent political comedy.
A coalition that attracted prominent politicians, former governors, legislators and a former Vice-President, with the ambition of becoming a formidable opposition platform, is now struggling with a question that should have been settled long before their political grand entrance. So, who actually has the authority to lead their party?
The ADC came together to challenge the incumbent government. Now, the party appears to be challenging itself. The irony is almost embarrassing.
The Federal High Court judgment delivered by Justice Peter Lifu in Abuja on November 5, 2026, has turned that question into a major crisis. The court nullified the David Mark-led leadership and decisions taken under its authority, including the processes that produced Atiku Abubakar as the ADC’s presidential candidate.
The party has since appealed the judgment and sought a stay of execution. It is entitled to pursue that legal option. But the bigger embarrassment cannot be wished away by filing an appeal.
Imagine a political party seeking the mandate to govern more than 200 million Nigerians, yet unable to establish an uncontested answer to the question of who is authorised to run its own affairs. What happens to the much-talked-about party structure, party discipline, party cohesion, maturity, focus and the big objective of presenting a credible team that Nigerians can believe is capable of leading them to greater fortunes?
Nigeria’s presidency is not a committee meeting where everyone arrives with a different interpretation of the party agenda.
When political heavyweights become constitutional lightweights, that is a great recipe for national disaster. The problem goes beyond a disagreement over personalities. It raises the more fundamental question of personal political influence being allowed to take precedence over the rules and procedures that should govern a political party and, nay, the nation itself.
The attraction of the ADC coalition looked obvious: the bringing together of influential opposition figures to create a common platform and present Nigerians with a credible alternative to the ruling APC. On paper, it sounded like a promising strategy. But somewhere between assembling the big names and organising the party, the fundamentals appear to have been overlooked. Behind the impressive collection of political heavyweights lies a troubling reality: big names, irreconcilable interests, discipline, team spirit and flawed, fragile foundations.
Political influence is not a substitute for constitutional imperatives and leadership authority. A former Senate President does not acquire an automatic right to lead a political party simply because of his stature. Neither does the presence of a former Vice-President make every decision taken by the party legally sound. It is presumed that every potential leader who pitches his or her tent with a political group has studied and accepted the rules of the union before making a public declaration of their standing. A party’s constitution is not an inconvenient document to be consulted only when political disagreements arise. It is the rulebook that must guide the organisation from the beginning. Respect for constitutional provisions cannot be selective. It is part of self-discipline and leadership quality to know the rules, play by the rules and ensure the enforcement of such rules for party cohesion and strength. The ADC leadership crisis is a case of ambition overriding institutional order. Unfortunately, some of its political actors appear to have treated the process of taking control as more important than establishing the legitimacy of that control.
At the centre of the ADC dispute is Nafiu Bala Gombe, a former Deputy National Chairman, who claimed that he was entitled to assume leadership following Ralph Nwosu’s resignation.
The ADC maintained that Bala had resigned from his position in May 2025. But questions have been raised about the documentation supporting that claim.
That is an awkward situation for a party hoping to present itself as a credible alternative to the ruling establishment. A leadership transition should not be a dark mystery requiring forensic investigation.
If a party cannot produce clear documentation showing how its leadership changed, how does it expect Nigerians to trust its capacity to manage more complicated national responsibilities confronting the Nigerian nation?
There is also an earlier judgment delivered by Justice Musa Liman on July 2, 2026, dismissing a separate challenge to the Mark-led leadership. The two cases involved different claims and legal questions. It would therefore be wrong to simply suggest that the later judgment overturned the earlier one. The legal issues will have to be tested through the appropriate appellate process.
The fact that the party’s leadership has become the subject of multiple court battles should itself worry political strategists. At present, the problem can be summed up in a few words: too many leaders, too little order.
Beyond the courtroom, the crisis exposes a deeper weakness in coalition politics. Bringing influential politicians together is one thing; reconciling their ambitions, interests and expectations under a common structure is quite another. A coalition built around the desire to displace an incumbent government must also demonstrate that its members can agree on leadership, strategy and the rules of engagement. Otherwise, the very differences that brought it together in opposition may eventually pull it apart. This is, in many ways, a self-inflicted crisis.
And what of Atiku?
For Atiku Abubakar, the situation is particularly uncomfortable. The veteran presidential contender, who has spent years pursuing Nigeria’s highest political office, now faces uncertainty over the platform on which he hopes to make what could be his final presidential bid in 2027. He narrowly escaped the same situation in the build-up to the last presidential election.
Atiku’s predicament illustrates that the pursuit of political power is one thing; securing a legitimate platform from which to exercise it is quite another.
The court did not declare Atiku personally ineligible to contest the presidency. The problem is that the validity of the process that produced him as the ADC candidate has been affected by the ruling.
In other words, the candidate may be ready, the ambition may be intact, and the political speeches may already be written, but the legal foundation of the ticket is still far from settled. Presently, it is now under serious challenge.
This is an unfortunate reminder that securing a presidential ticket requires more than winning political support. The process must also be legally defensible.
This is a lesson that the APC and other political parties should watch, learn and prepare for. The ADC crisis offers an opportunity. But the other parties should resist the temptation to celebrate too early. There is a lesson from across the Atlantic. Donald Trump’s Republican Party has suffered a major setback in the November 3, 2026, US midterm elections, with Democrats winning control of both chambers of Congress. The result demonstrates that even a sitting president with considerable political influence cannot take electoral support for granted.
Lord Acton’s famous warning that “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely” offers a useful lesson here. Trump’s midterm setback reminds governing parties that political dominance is never a permanent guarantee of public support. Electoral confidence must be continually earned through performance, accountability and public trust.
The lesson is not that the ADC’s troubles guarantee an APC victory, or that the American experience can be transplanted wholesale into Nigeria. The real lesson is that political power must continually be justified through performance and public confidence.
The ADC’s difficulties may create political opportunities, but they do not automatically translate into electoral victory for the ruling party.
The APC must strengthen its structures, consolidate its national support base, deepen inclusiveness and improve its national and international profile ahead of 2027. More importantly, it must communicate its achievements, address public concerns and give Nigerians compelling reasons to renew its mandate.
An opposition party can weaken itself through internal conflict. A governing party, however, must never become so comfortable in power that it forgets the people who put it in power.
While ADC has some serious housekeeping to do before promising to rescue Nigeria, it needs to address its own organisational structure and players.
A political coalition cannot build national confidence on a foundation of unresolved perennial internal disputes. It cannot preach institutional accountability while struggling to establish the legitimacy of its own leadership.
Interestingly, this is not the first time questions have been raised about the preparedness of Atiku’s political camp and the ADC platform for the enormous task of contesting and governing Nigeria. In my August 5 commentary, “Atiku’s Petrol Subsidy Proposal: Populism Without a Credible Exit Plan,” I drew attention to contradictory statements from Atiku’s senior aides over a major economic policy proposal. My concern went beyond the subsidy itself. It was about coordination, policy discipline and the ability of the political camp to speak with one voice on issues of national importance. I questioned how a team struggling to communicate a coherent position on a major policy proposal would manage the far more complicated responsibilities of government. The unfolding ADC leadership crisis now brings another dimension of that preparedness question into focus. The concerns are no longer limited to policy communication; they now extend to leadership, institutional order and the legitimacy of the party’s internal arrangements.
Ultimately, the ADC has become a coalition that must first conquer itself before it can credibly earn the trust of Nigerians or challenge the government.
Perhaps its first campaign slogan should not be about rescuing Nigeria just yet. It should be much simpler: Let us first agree on who is in charge.
That, at least, would be a more sensible place to start.
My Verdict
A political coalition seeking to rescue a nation must first demonstrate that it can organise, discipline and govern itself. Nigeria cannot be expected to entrust its future to a coalition still struggling to establish who is in charge. Before promising to rescue Nigeria, the ADC must first put its own house in order.
You cannot rescue a nation when you have not yet learned to organise your own house.