ADC urges Federal High Court to release certified copy of judgment voiding Atiku’s candidacy

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has publicly called on the Federal High Court in Abuja to release the certified true copy (CTC) of a judgment delivered by Justice Peter Lifu. The ruling, handed down in early November 2026, nullified the nomination of former Vice President Atiku Abubakar as the ADC’s presidential candidate for the 2027 elections and dismissed the party’s caretaker committee led by Senator David Mark.

According to statements released by the ADC’s Presidential Campaign Council, the party’s counsel filed formal applications for the certified copy on 6 November 2026 for the first defendant and on the day the judgment was delivered for the third defendant. Both applications bore the court’s “PAID” stamp, indicating that the required fees had been paid. Despite Justice Lifu’s announcement in open court that the copies were ready, the ADC says it has not received the documents.

Background

The dispute stems from an internal leadership battle within the ADC. The Federal High Court ruled that the caretaker committee headed by Senator David Mark was unlawfully constituted and that Atiku Abubakar’s candidacy did not meet the party’s internal requirements. The judgment effectively reshapes the party’s leadership structure ahead of the 2027 general elections.

The ADC’s Director of Strategic Communication, Phrank Shaibu, has repeatedly highlighted that the party’s legal team complied with all procedural requirements, including payment of the assessed fee for a certified true copy. The court’s own records, as cited by the party, confirm that the applications were stamped “PAID.” The ADC characterises the continued withholding of the judgment as more than a routine administrative delay, describing it as a denial of access to a decision that directly affects the rights of its members.

Why it matters

The judgment has immediate political implications. By voiding Atiku’s candidacy and removing the David Mark‑led caretaker committee, the court’s decision could reshape the ADC’s candidate selection process and influence the party’s strategy for the 2027 presidential election. The ADC argues that without the certified copy, its members cannot fully understand the orders or mount an effective legal response, thereby undermining procedural fairness.

The party also raises concerns about the perceived impartiality of Justice Lifu, noting that the delay in providing the judgment could be interpreted as favouring one side in a highly contested political dispute. The ADC stresses that public confidence in the judiciary could be eroded if parties are denied access to official court documents after a judgment has been announced.

What happens next

The ADC has demanded that the Federal High Court release the certified true copy immediately and provide an explanation for the unanswered applications. The party’s statement, issued on 9 November 2026, calls for transparency and urges the court to address what it describes as a denial of access to justice. No specific timeline for compliance has been set by the court, and the ADC has indicated that it will continue to press the matter publicly.

The situation remains unresolved, with the ADC awaiting the court’s response while the broader political landscape prepares for the upcoming 2027 elections.