David Mark-led ADC Gets a Lifeline at Supreme Court, PDP Falls

• Majority voids PDP Ibadan convention over disobedience of court 

•Minority insist it’s internal affairs, outside court’s intervention

• INEC restores Mark, others on website 

•ADC welcomes judgment, reiterates call for Amupitan’s resignation

• PDP: Judgment on leadership crisis a dangerous bend  

•Wabara says he’s assumed party leadership

• Wike: Verdict has ended ‘Turaki faction’, Atiku is a political liability

Chuks Okocha, Olawale Ajimotokan, Alex Enumah and Adedayo Akinwale in Abuja

Relief and hope came the way of millions of supporters of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), yesterday, after the Supreme Court set aside an order that threatened the presence of the party in the 2027 general election.

The apex court, in a unanimous judgment, held that the order of “status quo ante bellum” issued on March 12, 2026, by the Court of Appeal, Abuja, “was unnecessary, unwarranted and improper”.

In another stroke, it was end of the road for a faction of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) led by Governor Seyi Makinde of Oyo State as the same apex court nullified the convention it organised last November in Ibadan.

The court in a split judgment of three-to-two voided the convention that produced the Tanimu Turaki-led faction on the grounds that it was conducted in blatant disobedience of a valid court order.

The David Mark-led leadership of the ADC and the Turaki-led faction of the PDP had approached the apex court to challenge the judgments of the Court of Appeal entered against them.

They predicated their separate cases on the grounds that the cases in which judgment was entered against them were purely internal matters of political parties, which courts ought not to entertain.

They therefore prayed the apex court to reverse the decisions of the lower courts for being unjusticiable.

But, in the separate judgments delivered in the matter by the supreme court, the appeal of the Mark-led ADC succeeded in part, that of the Turaki-led faction failed as the majority judgment of the apex court, held that the convention stood nullified because it was conducted despite a court order restraining it.

In the unanimous judgment delivered by Justice Mohammed Garba, the Supreme Court held that the appellate court was right when it dismissed the appeal of David Mark for lacking in merit and also ordered accelerated hearing at the trial court.

Garba, however, faulted the appellate court for going ahead to issue a preservative order, after striking out the appeal for being incompetent.

The Supreme Court further berated the the appellate court for raising the issue of preserving the res (subject matter of the case) on its own (somoto) and then issuing an order directing parties to maintain status quo ante bellum.

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), had last month removed the names of David Mark and other national executive officer of the ADC from its portal as leaders of the party.

The action of the electoral umpire by implication robbed the ADC the chances of participating or fielding candidates at next year’s general election.

Among the reliefs sought by Mark at the apex court included an order setting aside the appellate court order directing the maintenance of status quo ante bellum.

Justice Garba, who delivered the lead judgment held that the lower court was wrong to have raised the issue “somoto” (on its own, not requested by any party in the matter), and subsequently issued the status quo ante bellum order.

According to the judgment, it was wrong for the lower court to issue any preservative order in a case pending before the trial court.

“The directive made (status quo ante bellum) after striking out the appeal and issuing an accelerated hearing was unnecessary, unwarranted and improper”, Garba held, adding: “It is hereby set aside”.

Having resolved issue one and two against the appellant, Justice Garba, also made an order directing the case back to the trial court, for continuation of hearing.

According to the apex court, the trial court neither granted nor refused the order of interlocutory injunction restraining INEC from recognising the Mark leadership nor restrained the Mark-led leadership from parading themselves as leaders of the ADC, but held that the respondents should appear before the court to show cause why they should not be restrained.

But in the case of the PDP, the majority judgment which voided the Ibadan convention dwelled more on the disobedience of the appellants.

Justice Stephen Adah, who delivered the lead majority judgment disclosed that upon their perusal of the record of appeal, the apex court found the issue of disobedience which was not disputed by any party in the appeal.

According to the apex court, rather than appealing the judgment of the trial court, which restrained them from proceeding with the November 15 and 16 National Convention, the appellants “went forum shopping” to get a favourable order from a court of coordinate jurisdiction, and only appealed the judgment after the convention has been held.

While stressing that orders of court remained binding until set aside, Justice Adah held that, “When a party refuses to obey the orders of a court, he must not be heard by the court”, adding that this type of abuse of court was unpardonable.

The apex court held that once abuse was established, the court was bound to invoke its inherent powers, adding that the court would not lend its machinery to a litigant, who violated the valid orders of a court.

While holding that the appellant abused court process in conducting the Ibadan convention, Justice Adah held that the conduct of the November 15 and 16, 2015 convention in violation of an order of court was therefore “null and void.

“Having resolved the sole issue issue against the appellant, the appeal lacks merit and it is accordingly dismissed. The cross appeal is also lacking in merit and it is also dismissed,” she stressed.

However, in the minority judgment delivered by Justice Haruna Tsammani and Abubakar Umar, the apex court held that the case before the trial court was strictly an internal matter of the PDP, which the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain.

While agreeing with the majority judgment that it was wrong of the appellant to have disobeyed the judgment of the trial court, Tsammani stated that the action was not enough ground to dismiss the appeal, which the trial court ought not to have entertained in the first instance.

Tsammani faulted his colleagues for raising the issue of disobedience on its own, when none of the parties raised it.

He recalled that the apex court in several decisions has warned against raising issues (somoto) not conversed by any party, adding that the appellant was not giving the opportunity to defend itself over the alleged disobedience.

He, accordingly, allowed the appeal, stressing that the Federal High Court lacked the necessary jurisdiction to entertain the suit in the first place.

“Since, the trial court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the matter, the suit is accordingly struck out,” Tsammani held.

Justice Umar also pointed out that the issue of convention and congresses including party leadership were internal matters of political parties, which no court has jurisdiction.

“The issue has been resolved severally by this court that they are not justiciable,” he stated, adding that contrary to the position of the trial court, the mat-ter was not against INEC.

“The suit did not disclose any dereliction, nor complain was made against INEC …it did not disclose any cause of action against INEC,” he said.

According to the minority judgment, the law permitted court to only intervene in issues bordering on primary or post election matters, stressing that the issues of the sale of nomination forms to aspirant did not fall within the categories of issues that a court could entertain.

“I am unable to go with the majority judgment. The appeal has merit and should be allowed. The Federal High Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the matter. Since the trial court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the matter, the suit is accordingly struck out,” he said.

Speaking further, Justice Tsammani urged his colleagues to allow political parties and politicians “fall and rise with each experience,” and without the hand of the court.

He warned that if the court continued to indulge politicians, they would continue to use the court as a tool to out-do themselves.

The five-member panel led by Justice Mohammed Garba had last Wednesday, shortly after lawyers representing the ADC and PDP in the different appeals, adopted their processes as their briefs of argument for and against the appeals, announced that judgment has been reserved to a date to be communicated to parties.

The appellate court had in a ruling in the appeal filed by the Mark-led leadership against the ruling of a Federal High Court, Abuja, last month, ordered status quo ante bellum.

Based on the ruling of the appellate court, INEC withdrew the recognition accorded the Mark-led faction as authentic leadership of the ADC.

Gombe, had last year dragged the Mark-led leadership before Justice Emeka Nwite, to challenge the leadership of the ADC led by Mark.

He had among others sought an order restraining the Mark-led leadership from parading itself as leader of the ADC, insisting that he remained the authentic leader of the party, following the resignation of the then chairman and other members of the executive.

Mark had been announced chairman of an interim national executive of the ADC, at a meeting in Abuja, last year and his chairmanship substantiated at the convention of the party held recently.

But Justice Nwite declined to issue a restraining order against the Mark-led leadership and instead ordered the applicant to put the defendants on notice.

Reacting, Mark approached the appellate court to challenge the jurisdiction of Nwite to entertain the suit by Gombe in the first place.

While insisting that the trial court cannot entertain the suit suit by Gombe, for being an internal matter of the ADC, Mark also argued that the trial court became functus officio when he refused the grant of the restraining order against the Mark-led leadership.

But the appellate court, in its judgment last month, dismissed Mark’s appeal and returned the case to the trial court.

While the appellate court had ordered accelerated hearing in the matter, it went ahead to order status quo ante bellum, an order which INEC acted upon to de-recognise the Mark leadership as well as remove their names from its portal.

Displeased, Mark approached the Supreme Court to set aside aside the ruling of the appellate court.

Only a few days ago, the ADC pleaded with the Supreme Court to deliver its judgment in the appeal within the next three days.

The ADC, in a letter to the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, claimed that failure of the apex court to deliver judgment within the above period, would jeopardise the chances of the party in the 2027 general election, as well as dash the hope of millions of Nigerians intending to vote for the ADC and its candidates at the general election slated for early January, next year.

In the letter dated April 28, the party’s lead counsel, Mr Shuaibu Aruwa, SAN, recalled that the apex court “graciously heard expeditiously on April 22, 2026 and judgment was thereafter reserved to a date to be communicated by the court.”

In addition, the ADC drew the attention of the CJN to INEC’s timetable for the 2027 general election and the activities in readiness which it claimed have already commenced.

The Turaki faction of the PDP had also approached the apex court to challenge the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which had nullified the convention for being held in disobedience of a valid order of court.

Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja, had last year in a judgment restrained then Ambassador Iliya Damagum-led National Executive Committee of the PDP from proceeding with the convention slated for November 15 and 16, 2026, in Ibadan Oyo State.

Justice Lifu had in his judgment ordered that the convention should not hold until an aspirant to the office of national chairman, Alhaji Sule Lamido, was given the opportunity to purchase interest and nomination forms to enable him participate in the convention for the election of national officers.

The party, however, went ahead to conduct the convention in disregard to the orders of the court.

The PDP predicated its action on the grounds that the court of Justice Lifu lacked the jurisdiction to stop the convention as the issue brought before him was an internal matter of the PDP, which no court has jurisdiction to delve into.

The appellate court, in its judgment last month, disagreed that the issue at the trial court was an internal affairs of a political parties which courts could not entertain.

The three-member panel of the appellate court subsequently nullified the outcome of the convention for being held in disobedience to the orders of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

Dissatisfied, the PDP approached the apex court praying it to accept the appeal against the lower court judgment, set the judgment aside and hold that the issue was an internal matter of the PDP, which both the Court of Appeal and Federal High Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain.

INEC Restores Mark, Aregbesola’s Name on Website

Following the judgment of the Supreme Court yes-terday, the INEC, has recognised the Senator David Mark-led National Working Committee (NWC) of the ADC.

The commission, had in April, citing the order of the Court of Appeal, deleted the names of Mark-led NWC on its website.

The electoral body said it would not receive any further communication or deal with any of the parties or groups pertaining the affairs of the party and would not monitor any meeting, Congress or Convention convened on behalf ADC by any group until the matter was decided by the Federal High Court, Abuja.

The commission stressed that its decision was to ensure it did not act in any way capable of foisting a fait accompli on the court or otherwise rendering nugatory the proceedings before the trial court.

ADC Welcomes Judgment, Reiterates Call for Resignation of INEC Chair, Amupitan

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has welcomed the Supreme Court ruling affirming Senator David Mark as its National Chairman and Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola as National Secretary.

It described the decision as a clear validation of the party leadership’s position and a definitive confirmation that the INEC decision to de-recognise her leadership was fundamentally faulty.

In a statement issued by its National Publicity Secretary, Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, the party said the judgement reinforced the primacy of the rule of law in Nigeria’s democratic space and justified her faith in the Supreme Court.

The party commended the five-man panel of the Apex Court, whose unanimous judgment, it said, did great credit to the institution of judiciary in our country.

It also urged its members and democratic stakeholders to remain vigilant, while renewing its call for the resignation of INEC Chairman, Prof. Joash Amupitan

The ADC congratulated its members and leaders across the country over the Supreme Court ruling which affirmed the leadership of the party.

“Today’s decision is a clear and unequivocal affirmation that our party, its structures, and its leadership under our National Chairman, Senator Mark, and our National Secretary, Ogbeni Aregbesola, are legitimate.

“It lays to rest all contrived disputes and manufactured uncertainties, and reinforces the principle that the rule of law, not political manipulation, must guide the affairs of our democracy.

“We commend the five-man panel of the Supreme Court, whose unanimous judgment, has today done great credit to the judiciary in our country and our political system.

“However, while we welcome this judgement, we do not mistake it for the end of the struggle. The events leading up to this moment have exposed a troubling pattern of interference, bad faith, and attempts to weaken opposition voices in Nigeria. Let it be clearly stated: the ADC will not be intimidated, distracted, or silenced.

“We remain resolute in our mission to provide Nigerians with a credible alternative, anchored on ending insecurity, reducing the cost of living, and creating jobs at scale.

“We, therefore, urge all our members, supporters, and democratic stakeholders across the country to remain vigilant. Democracy is not defended in a single courtroom victory, it is sustained through constant vigilance, active participation, and the courage to resist any attempt to undermine the will of the people.

“What has been attempted once can be attempted again, hence, we must not let our guard down,” the ADC spokesman stressed.

He added that, “In light of this ruling, the ADC reaffirms its long-standing position that Prof. Joash Amupitan, the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), must resign.

“The circumstances surrounding this matter, now clarified by the Supreme Court, point to either a grave failure of judgment or a deliberate act of bad faith.

“Whichever it is, the outcome is the same: the integrity and neutrality required of the office have been compromised. Nigeria’s democracy cannot afford an electoral umpire whose actions raise legitimate questions about impartiality.

“INEC must now restore the recognition of the David Mark-led leadership on its website, and in all formal channels of communication.

“On its part, the ADC will continue to stand firm, speak clearly, and act decisively in defense of democracy, justice, and the Nigerian people,” Abdullahi stated.

PDP: Supreme Court’s Judgment on Party’s Leadership Crisis a Dangerous Bend

The Tanimu Turaki-led Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has reacted to yesterday’s supreme court judgement that voided the Ibadan, Oyo State convention on November 15 and 16, describing it as a dangerous bend.

However, in a statement by the National Publicity Secretary, Ini Emeombong, the party said, “Today, the Supreme Court of Nigeria, through a five-man panel presided over by Justice Mohammed Garba, in a split decision (3–2), upheld the judgments of the Court of Appeal and the Federal High Court, wherein the convention held in Ibadan was nullified.

“The three Justices (Chioma Nwosu-Iheme, Stephen Adah, and Garba) hinged their judgments on the disrespect of a valid, subsisting judgment of the Federal High Court and therefore held that, being in contempt, the appellants cannot be accommodated in the apex court, thereby dismissing the appeal.

“The minority judgments by Justices Haruna Tsammani and Abubakar Umar held that the two appeals emanate from matters which are internal affairs of the PDP and are therefore non-justiciable.

“The case at the FHC was not challenging any act or decision of any federal government agency but the leadership contest of the party, and therefore not justiciable.

“Furthermore, they held that it is not the duty of the court to fish out matters to execute the case for the respondent, because the majority judgment undertook the duty of raising matters suo motu without calling on the parties to address them.

“This is against the position of the apex court, wherein parties must be given the opportunity to address the court on matters raised suo motu.

“With this split judgment, which also upheld the Court of Appeal’s suspension of Ajibade, SAN, Anyanwu, and others, this effectively leaves the PDP as a party without a defined leadership.

“To this end, we are certain that the existing organs of the party will take the necessary steps to salvage the party and confer leadership on it going forward.

“This leads the vehicle of our party towards a dangerous bend, which, if not carefully navigated, may not only affect the party but also multi-party democracy in our country.

Wabara: I’ve Assumed PDP Leadership

Chairman of the PDP Board of Trustees, Senator Adolphus Wabara, yesterday, announced that he has assumed the national leadership of the PDP being an intervention by the Board of Trustees (BoT).

According to a statement he signed, Wabara said, ‘’It is with the utmost sense of duty and responsibility that the Board of Trustees (BoT) of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) assumes leadership of our great party today, Thursday, 30th April, 2026 pursuant to the empowering provisions of the Constitution of the PDP (As amended in 2017).

‘’This constitutional intervention of the BoT is so as not to allow any leadership vacuum at the national level of our party following judgment of the Supreme Court.

‘’Sadly, the Supreme Court, today delivered an unpleasant judgment against our party in which it pronounced an invalidation of the 15th to 16th November 2025 National Convention of the PDP held in Ibadan, Oyo State, which produced the Kabiru Tanimu Turaki-led National Working Committee of our Party.

‘’While the Supreme Court invalidated the Ibadan Convention, it also in a unanimous decision of the five justices on the panel, upheld the suspension of Senator Samuel Anyanwu, Hon. Umar Bature, Kamaldeen Ajibade as National Secretary, National Organising Secretary and National Legal Adviser respectively from the Party.

‘’The implication of today’s judgment by the Supreme Court is that all actions taken by Senator Samuel Anyanwu, Hon. Umar Bature and Barr. Kamaldeen Ajibade including the appointment of Abdulrahman Mohammed as Acting National Chairman, the composition of the National Caretaker Working Committee and the conduct and outcome of the March 29th, 2026 Convention in Abuja are illegal, null and ab initio void.

‘’The consequential invalidation of both the Abdulrahman Mohammed-led as well as the Kabiru Tanimu Turaki-led Working Committees directly places the statutory onus of leadership of our great party on the shoulders of the Board of Trustees (BoT) as the Second Highest Organ of the Party, pursuant to the express and unambiguous provision of Section 32 (5) of the PDP Constitution (as amended in 2017).

‘’Against this backdrop, the BoT hereby immediately assumes responsibility of the national working leadership of the PDP as immediate constitutional remedial steps to foster genuine reconciliation, salvage, stabilise and return the party to good political health.

‘’In the light of the foregoing, an emergency meeting of the National Executive Committee (NEC), pursuant to the provisions of Section 31 of the Constitution of the PDP will be summoned to, among other things, appoint an Interim  National Working Committee to take charge of the National Secretariat of our Party and pilot the affairs of the Party at the national level so as to meet all the timeline in the Electoral Act, 2026 and ensure that the PDP fields candidates and also emerged victorious in all elective positions in the 2027 general election.

‘’Consequently, all staff of the PDP are hereby directed to resume at the National Secretariat of the party under the leadership of the BoT ahead of the appointment of the Interim National Working Committee.

‘’The BoT commends the courage, effort and resilience of our governors, Governor Bala Mohammed and Governor Seyi Makinde, the National Assembly caucus, the National Ex-officios, the Forum of PDP State Chairmen and State chapters, the Youth and Women Wings and other organs and bodies in the PDP for standing strong for the party at this trying time.

‘’The BoT therefore calls on all leaders and members of the party to jettison all personal and group interests and come together as one family in the overall interest of our Party, democracy and the wellbeing of millions of Nigerians whose hope are anchored on the PDP. 

‘’The PDP has suffered enough. The painful victims of this unfortunate episode is the Nigerian people. The time has therefore come for us to make sacrifices, sheathe our swords and embrace genuine reconciliations for lasting peace and chart a new course for our party.’’

Wike: Verdict Has Ended ‘Turaki Faction’ in PDP, Atiku is a political liability

Minister of the FCT, Nyesom Wike, has said the judgement delivered yesterday by the Supreme Court has nailed the coffin of the ‘Turaki Faction’ as no such faction existed in the eyes of the law.

Wike affirmed this yesterday while briefing the media after the apex court dismissed the appeals filed by Turaki and his group.

He also declared that the PDP has emerged united and free of internal rancours following the decisive pronouncement by the Supreme Court.

Wike dismissed insinuation that the Supreme Court affirmed the suspension of the PDP National Secretary, Senator Samuel Anyanwu, saying no such issue was brought for determination before the court.

“Today, the Supreme Court has brought to an end the so-called factions of the PDP. There is no more faction in the party. There is only one PDP,” Wike declared.

He averred that the Supreme Court set aside the convention held in Ibadan on November 15 to 16, 2025 by the Turaki faction while validating the alternative convention held by his cohorts in Abuja on March 28-28 this year.

“This confirms there is only one PDP, led by Abdulrahman. There is no longer a faction; the PDP is now a single, unified entity.

“I have always said that people must understand the law. Being in a position of power does not mean you can act as if there are no laws. There are rules regulating party activities, and we must comply with them,” Wike said.

He stressed the need for political actors to operate strictly within the framework of the law, warning against actions capable of undermining party constitutions and electoral regulations.

“The fact that you are in a position does not mean you can act outside the law. There are rules guiding party activities, and those rules must be followed,” he added.

Wike also downplayed the political relevance of former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar and Governor Seyi Makinde of Oyo State, currently holding coalition talks with opposition African Democratic Convention (APC), saying they were not natural assets but political liabilities in the PDP.

Wike said: “I see that my brothers and friends, including Seyi Makinde, are currently holding a coalition meeting. We are not part of that; we are the main opposition party.

“I do not know where they are heading now, especially with the judgment against the ADC. The Federal High Court yesterday ruled that their actions would not be recognised. Their hopes are dashed.

“Regarding those who left our party for the ADC—people like Atiku Abubakar—we do not want them back. They are not natural assets; they are natural liabilities.

“While some people left simply because they were unsure of the party’s direction or who would sign their INEC forms, those ones may return. However, those who intended to bring the PDP down from the beginning will not be welcomed back.

“Our party is the main opposition, but we do not practice ‘opposition for opposition’s sake.’ Our approach is constructive. We will not work with the Atiku group to form a broad-based opposition. Opposition should call the ruling party to account, not destroy the country. If you destroy the country, nothing moves forward.”

Regarding the legal implications of the ruling for the ADC, Wike said his understanding of the Supreme Court’s decision was that the ADC must return to the Federal High Court for the conclusion of their matter, saying the Supreme Court only vacated the ‘status quo ante bellum’ order.

“If the leadership of Ralph Nwosu (or the relevant party head) has been restored, the ADC still faces significant problems. There is already a Federal High Court judgment barring them from recognising certain actions. They are neither here nor there, and this is the result of failing to make sacrifices for the sake of party unity.”

Kachukwu: S’Court Displayed Solomon’s Wisdom

A member of the ADC, Dumebi Kachukwu, has described the supreme court court judgement in the leadership crisis rocking the party as displaying the wisdom of King Solomon.

In his reaction to the supreme court decision, Kachukwu said, ‘’Today, the Supreme Court of Nigeria displayed King Solomon’s wisdom in refusing to be used as a tool of destabilisation by the David Mark-led group when it directed both factions to return to the trial court for continuation of the trial.

‘’In vacating the order of status quo ante bellum all the Supreme Court has said is that they are not stopping any of the factions from calling themselves any name they choose to call themselves, but they should allow the lower court to determine if any of the two factions is the rightful leadership of the ADC.

‘’This case is akin to two thieves claiming ownership of a stolen car, but they have been told to take their proof of ownership before a court to determine if any of them is indeed the owner of the car.

‘’In the case of Nafiu Bala and the David Mark band of adventurers, we know that none of the two parties has a rightful claim to the leadership of the party. It is important note that the Supreme Court has not directed INEC to recognise the David Mark led group.

‘’It is also important to note that Justice Joyce Abdulmalik made the following fundamental declarations in her ruling yesterday in a case between the state chairmen of the ADC as plaintiffsand David Mark and his merry men as defendants.”

HURIWA: S’Court Verdict Has Trappings of a Procurement By the Highest Bidder

The Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA), has expressed concern over the Supreme Court judgment nullifying the PDP national convention, saying it was a judicial miscarriage that not only served political interests, but has all the trappings of a procurement by the highest bid-der.

HURIWA, in a statement by its national coordinator, Emmanuel Obwubiko, stated that, “The ruling, in our considered view, reflects not just a legal conclusion but a deeply questionable outcome that appears to align conveniently with the strategic interests of powerful political actors.

“This verdict has all the trappings of a procurement by the highest bidder. It reeks of political trade-offs by influential figures aligned with the presidency, who are determined to weaken, fracture, and ultimately sell off the PDP as a viable opposition platform.

“The association is particularly alarmed by allegations and emerging patterns suggesting that some governors elected on the platform of the PDP may have played complicit roles in undermining their own party.

“It is both tragic and dangerous that individuals entrusted with the mandate of the people could allegedly engage in actions that amount to the political crucifixion of their own party. If these claims hold any weight, then what we are witnessing is a betrayal of democratic trust at the highest level,” HURIWA warned.

Continuing, it added that, “What we are witnessing goes beyond the PDP. This is about the future of opposition politics in Nigeria. If judicial outcomes—rightly or wrongly perceived—begin to mirror political expectations, then democracy itself is imperilled.”

HURIWA further warned that the verdict could accelerate the erosion of multiparty democracy by weakening opposition structures and consolidating political dominance in a manner that undermines electoral competitiveness ahead of the 2027 general election.

“The implication is clear: a major opposition party has been thrown into deeper crisis at a critical time in Nigeria’s democratic trajectory. This raises legitimate concerns about whether the playing field is being systematically tilted,” the group added.