Atiku’s aide challenges INEC over silence on Court judgment upholding David Mark-led ADC leadership

Paul Ibe, media aide to former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar, has challenged the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to explain why it has yet to clarify its position on a Federal High Court judgment affirming the David Mark-led leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

Ibe’s challenge followed INEC Chairman, Professor Joash Amupitan’s assurance that the commission would comply with binding court decisions concerning Atiku’s participation in the 2027 presidential election.

However, the former Vice-President’s aide argued that the commission’s position raised questions about its treatment of another court judgment concerning the leadership of the ADC, the platform on which Atiku is pursuing his presidential ambition.

In a statement posted on X, Ibe acknowledged that obedience to court orders was a legal obligation but insisted that INEC must explain how it intends to apply the judgment delivered on July 2, 2026, by Justice Musa Liman, which upheld the emergence of the David Mark-led ADC leadership.

He questioned whether the judgment had been set aside by another court and demanded that INEC identify the specific judicial orders it considers binding, particularly those affecting the ADC leadership and its candidates ahead of the 2027 general election.

According to him, Amupitan’s general assurance that the commission would obey court decisions was insufficient without a clear explanation of how the different judicial pronouncements affecting the party would be reconciled.

“INEC therefore owes Nigerians a clear explanation of how it intends to reconcile the two decisions—not merely a general declaration that it will obey the judiciary,” Ibe said.

READ ALSO; Dalung claims ‘message from Buhari’s grave’ urges Nigerians to vote Atiku in 2027

He stressed that his demand was not for the electoral commission to disregard any court ruling but to demonstrate consistency in its interpretation and application of judicial decisions.

Ibe maintained that any apparent conflict between the judgments should be resolved by the appropriate appellate court rather than through what he described as selective treatment of judicial pronouncements by INEC.

He also warned against a situation in which court decisions favourable to the opposition would be treated differently from those that might not align with its political interests.

“INEC must demonstrate that its guiding principle is the law—not the political convenience of the outcome,” he added.

The controversy comes amid growing political and legal attention surrounding the ADC’s leadership structure and the preparations by opposition figures, including Atiku, for the 2027 presidential election.

INEC’s handling of the relevant court decisions is expected to remain a major issue as political parties and aspirants position themselves ahead of the next general election.