NDC and SDP condemn court ruling that nullifies David Mark-led ADC leadership

Two major opposition parties in Nigeria, the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) and the Social Democratic Party (SDP), have issued strong condemnations of a Federal High Court judgment that derecognised the leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC). The court ruling, delivered in Abuja, nullified the leadership structure headed by former Senate President David Mark. Both parties described the decision as a significant threat to Nigeria’s democratic processes, particularly in the context of the approaching 2027 general elections.

A declaration issued by the NDC was signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Osa Director, Esq., warned that such judicial interventions could be interpreted as an effort to stifle opposition voices and weaken multi-party democracy. The party expressed concern that the manner in which these judgments are being delivered from the High Courts suggests a possible intent to shut the ADC out of the forthcoming electoral process. The NDC urged the ADC to immediately appeal the judgment and called on appellate courts to grant the matter an accelerated hearing to prevent prolonged uncertainty from undermining the party’s ability to participate effectively in the elections.

Similarly, the SDP condemned the ruling during a consultative engagement in Abuja between its National Working Committee (NWC) and governorship candidates from nine states. Prof. SDP National Chairman Sadiq Gombe declared that the organization would oppose any tactics aimed at undermining democratic standards or preventing Nigerians from selecting their leaders free from judicial or political meddling. He explicitly dismissed the alleged disqualification of the ADC leadership and its presidential nominee, Atiku Abubakar, contending that political entities possess the fundamental right to field contenders and that such court rulings hinder the democratic process.

Background

The controversy centres on a Federal High Court judgment in Abuja that nullified the leadership of the ADC, a party led by David Mark. The ruling has prompted reactions from other opposition groups who view it as part of a broader pattern of judicial actions affecting political parties. The SDP also addressed a separate political development during the same briefing, rejecting a proposed "rainbow coalition" championed by Nyesom Wike, the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory. The SDP charged the governing All Progressives Congress (APC) with engineering secret schemes to penetrate rival parties and diminish their internal frameworks prior to the 2027 elections.

Prof. Gombe noted that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, of the APC, also emerged as the presidential candidate in 2023 despite internal opposition from within his own party and the camp of then-President Muhammadu Buhari. He argued that the current administration is itself a product of democratic processes and should not support actions that undermine the democratic rights of other parties. The SDP further warned that any member involved in the proposed coalition would face severe internal disciplinary proceedings. Furthermore, the group called upon the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to release a genuine and confirmed voter list immediately so that it could be examined by the public.

Why it matters

The reactions from the NDC and SDP highlight growing tensions between the judiciary and political parties in Nigeria. The NDC cautioned that failing to address such rulings with care might lead to the perception that the judiciary is being leveraged to obstruct democratic involvement. The organization highlighted the necessity for courts to safeguard their autonomy, neutrality, and institutional soundness, while warning against rulings that erode democratic bodies. The SDP echoed these sentiments, stating that they would not allow anything to truncate their democracy. The involvement of high-profile figures such as David Mark and Atiku Abubakar underscores the high stakes involved, as the outcome of these legal battles could determine the electoral viability of major opposition parties in the 2027 general elections. The parties' calls for accelerated hearings and clean electoral registers reflect their desire to ensure a fair and transparent electoral environment.