2027: Why the ADC Supreme Court Battle Could Weaken the Anti-APC Coalition

The leadership crisis rocking the African Democratic Congress (ADC) is heading to the Supreme Court, but the legal dispute may ultimately prove less damaging than the political fallout.

As Nigeria’s opposition coalition battles over control of the party, valuable time is slipping away—time that could have been spent building public trust, presenting policies, and preparing for the 2027 general elections.

By the time the Supreme Court delivers its final verdict, the legal questions surrounding the ADC may have been resolved. Whether the party can recover from months of internal conflict is a different matter entirely.

A Party Consumed by Internal Battles

For several months, the ADC has remained in the headlines—not for its political agenda or vision for governance, but for court cases, rival leadership claims, disputed congresses, and constitutional disagreements.

Each court ruling has sparked fresh appeals, prolonging uncertainty within the party. In politics, prolonged uncertainty can be just as damaging as electoral defeat.

The latest Court of Appeal judgment has transformed what once appeared to be an internal leadership dispute into a broader question about the credibility and readiness of Nigeria’s opposition ahead of 2027.

The Court of Appeal Ruling

In a split two-to-one decision, the Court of Appeal upheld an earlier Federal High Court ruling restraining the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognizing state congresses conducted by committees appointed by the National Working Committee (NWC) led by former Senate President David Mark.

The appellate court held that, under the ADC constitution, only elected state executive committees possess the authority to organize state congresses. It further ruled that the congresses and subsequent national convention organized under the Mark-led leadership were invalid because they allegedly violated an earlier court order.

The David Mark faction has appealed the decision to the Supreme Court, insisting that the judgment neither removed its leadership nor affected candidates already submitted to INEC.

What the Supreme Court Will Decide

Appearing on The Morning Show on Arise Television, constitutional lawyer Liborous Oshoma argued that the Supreme Court’s task would largely revolve around one crucial issue.

According to him, the ADC must demonstrate that the caretaker committee appointed by the Mark-led National Working Committee was no longer responsible for conducting the disputed congresses or primary elections.

If the party cannot establish that distinction, Oshoma suggested that the legal consequences could extend beyond the party’s internal leadership dispute.

He warned that the presidential ticket itself could be affected, adding that while the legal truth would eventually emerge, time may no longer be on the party’s side.

That observation highlights what may be the coalition’s greatest challenge. The real enemy may not be the courtroom but the calendar.

The Political Stakes

The legal arguments before the Supreme Court are relatively clear. The political consequences, however, are far more complicated.

The David Mark-led leadership currently enjoys recognition regarding candidates already uploaded to INEC’s portal, including the reported Atiku Abubakar–Rotimi Amaechi presidential ticket and numerous legislative candidates.

Meanwhile, the Dumebi Kachikwu faction continues to maintain that it controls the legitimate party structures at the state level.

Should the Supreme Court uphold the Court of Appeal’s judgment, questions may arise over the validity of party structures that produced candidates already submitted to INEC.

If the apex court overturns the ruling, the Mark-led leadership may retain legal authority but still face the difficult task of rebuilding unity after months of internal division.

Either outcome leaves the coalition confronting significant political challenges that extend beyond the courtroom.

Litigation Versus Campaigning

Some opposition figures have alleged that prolonged legal disputes ultimately benefit the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) by distracting rival parties. Those remain political allegations, and there is no verified evidence that either the judiciary or INEC is acting under the direction of the federal government.

What is undeniable, however, is that extended litigation often drains political parties of valuable time, resources, donor confidence, and public attention.

Instead of discussing policy alternatives or engaging voters, party leaders become preoccupied with legal strategy and internal power struggles.

Regardless of how those disputes originate, the political cost can be substantial.

Lessons from Nigeria’s Political History

Nigeria’s political history offers several examples of how unresolved internal crises can undermine electoral prospects.

The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) spent years navigating the Sheriff-Makarfi leadership crisis before the courts eventually settled the dispute ahead of the 2019 elections.

Similarly, the APC lost all elective positions in Zamfara State during the 2019 elections after the Supreme Court ruled that the party failed to conduct valid primaries.

Those episodes demonstrate an important lesson: political parties do not always lose elections because their opponents are stronger. Sometimes they lose because internal disputes consume the attention that should have been devoted to winning voters.

Three Possible Outcomes

The Supreme Court’s decision could produce several scenarios.

The first is an affirmation of the Court of Appeal judgment, potentially reopening questions about party congresses and triggering fresh negotiations over the ADC’s leadership structure.

The second is a reversal of the ruling, restoring legal certainty to the David Mark-led National Working Committee and allowing the coalition to shift its focus toward electioneering.

A third possibility is prolonged delay. If the final judgment comes close to key electoral deadlines, whichever faction eventually prevails may inherit a party that has already lost valuable momentum and public confidence.

More Than an Internal Party Dispute

For many Nigerians, the case represents more than a leadership struggle within one political party.

A healthy democracy depends not only on competitive elections but also on the existence of credible alternatives capable of challenging those in power.

If opposition parties spend the critical months before an election fighting over internal control instead of presenting ideas, policies, and solutions to voters, the consequences extend beyond the ADC.

As the Supreme Court prepares to hear the case, one question looms over Nigeria’s political landscape:

Even if a party wins in court, can it still win at the ballot box after losing the confidence and attention of the electorate?