A lawyer representing the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Kalu Kalu, has dismissed claims that a recent Federal High Court judgment invalidated former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar’s candidacy for the January 16, 2027 presidential election.
Kalu insisted that the judgment delivered by Justice Peter Lifu did not cancel Atiku’s nomination or that of other candidates produced under the Senator David Mark-led leadership of the party.
Speaking on Channels Television on Thursday, the lawyer said Nigerians were reading meanings into the ruling that were not contained in the court’s actual orders.
“There is no portion of that judgment that voids the candidacy of Atiku Abubakar and the other candidates of the party,” he said.
He added that the court did not make any specific order cancelling Atiku’s nomination as the ADC presidential candidate.
Kalu blamed the controversy on interpretations circulating on social media, arguing that some people had attributed decisions to the court that it never expressly made.
The controversy followed a November 5 judgment in a suit filed by Nafiu Bala Gombe, a former ADC Deputy National Chairman, challenging the emergence of the Mark-led leadership after the resignation of the party’s former National Chairman, Ralph Nwosu, and other executives in July 2025.
Gombe argued that the vacancies created by the resignations should have been filled through a democratic process in line with the party’s constitution and the Electoral Act.
In his ruling, Justice Lifu nullified the emergence of Mark and former Interior Minister, Rauf Aregbesola, as the party’s National Chairman and National Secretary, respectively.
The judge also declared all actions and decisions taken by Mark, Aregbesola and other members of the National Working Committee from July 29, 2025, null and void.
He further restrained the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising or dealing with the Mark-led executives as the party’s national officers.
The court also directed INEC not to recognise decisions taken at the ADC’s 99th National Executive Committee meeting held on July 27, 2025, through which the leadership emerged.
Justice Lifu held that the process did not meet the requirements for democratic elections under Section 82(3) of the Electoral Act 2022 and violated provisions of the party’s constitution and the 1999 Constitution.
The judge also rejected a resignation letter allegedly written by Gombe, which the Mark-led faction had relied on to justify his exclusion from the party’s leadership structure.
He said a comparison of the signature on the disputed letter with those on Gombe’s sworn statements revealed significant differences, making the document unreliable proof of his resignation.
Although the court recognised Gombe as the only elected member of the National Working Committee whose four-year tenure remained valid, it stopped short of declaring him the substantive National Chairman.
The ruling has raised questions about the ADC’s leadership and the status of candidates nominated under the Mark-led faction, particularly Atiku, who emerged as the party’s presidential candidate and later picked former Rivers State Governor, Rotimi Amaechi, as his running mate.
The judgment also came despite an earlier ruling delivered on July 2, 2026, by Justice Musa Liman of the same Federal High Court, which the Mark-led faction had relied on to defend its leadership.
The ADC argued that the two judgments were conflicting, insisting that a court of equal jurisdiction could not overturn or review the decision of another court of the same level.
Atiku also rejected the November 5 ruling, describing it as an attempt to weaken the opposition and frustrate his presidential ambition.
He vowed to challenge the decision at the Court of Appeal, insisting that it would not stop his campaign ahead of the 2027 elections.
The party’s National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, also dismissed the judgment as politically motivated, warning that its implications went beyond Atiku and the national leadership to thousands of candidates nominated by the party.
The ADC has since filed an appeal and an application for a stay of execution, urging INEC not to take any action that could undermine the outcome of the legal challenge.
Meanwhile, INEC said it would study the certified true copy of the judgment and seek legal advice before deciding on its next move.
The electoral commission maintained that it would not take a position on the dispute without first examining the court’s orders.
The legal battle has added another layer to the ADC’s internal crisis as the party prepares for the 2027 general elections, with rival factions continuing to disagree over the legitimacy of the Mark-led leadership and the candidates it produced.
