ADC accuses INEC chair of contempt, insists on proceeding with congresses 

The INEC chairperson also denied the ADC’s accusation that the electoral commission had taken sides due to the interpretation of the order of the appellate court.

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has accused the Chairperson of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Joash Amupitan, of acting in contempt of court over his comments warning the party against proceeding with its planned congresses and national convention.

In a statement on Friday by its spokesperson, Bolaji Abdullahi, the party rejected remarks made by Mr Amupitan during an interview with Arise Television, where he cautioned that conducting such activities could violate existing court orders.

The ADC described INEC’s position as a “wilful distortion” of the Court of Appeal’s directive to maintain the status quo, arguing that the commission had overstepped its supervisory role.

The party said it would continue with its planned congresses and national convention, arguing that they remain lawful and unaffected by the court order.

“The ADC reiterates that its right to organise congresses and hold its national convention is constitutionally guaranteed and has not been lawfully suspended by any court,” the statement added.

Dispute over court interpretation

The party said the INEC chairperson misapplied the legal doctrine of status quo ante bellum, insisting that the court’s preservation order was not intended to halt internal party activities.

“The preservation order… is intended to prevent actions that would irreversibly alter the subject matter of litigation, not to paralyse the internal functioning of a political party,” the statement said.

ADC further argued that determining what constitutes the “status quo” is a matter strictly for the courts, not an administrative body like INEC.

It maintained that no court order had expressly barred it from holding congresses or conventions, adding that democratic processes within a political party should continue unless specifically restrained by a competent court.

The party also faulted INEC’s position that it could not monitor its activities due to pending litigation, describing it as a misunderstanding of the commission’s statutory role.

The ADC said INEC’s absence at its congresses does not invalidate the activities. 

According to the statement, INEC’s duty to monitor party processes is triggered upon proper notification and does not determine the legality of such activities.

“By conflating its monitoring function with the validity of the processes themselves, INEC effectively places itself above the law,” the party said.

The ADC added that internal disputes within political parties are common in democratic systems and do not justify halting their constitutional functions.

Background

INEC and the ADC have disagreed since the former announced it would no longer recognise the party’s leadership until the Federal High Court in Abuja decided on a lawsuit before it, where the leadership of the party is currently being contested.

The dispute emerged after the former vice-national chairperson of the ADC, Nafiu Bala, challenged David Mark’s emergence as National President. 

Mr Bala argued that he should be the national chairperson, following the resignation of Ralph Nwosu, who previously headed the party. Mr Bala is challenging this at the Federal High Court.

On 18 September 2025, Mr Mark’s group filed an interlocutory appeal at the Court of Appeal, which was dismissed on 12 March. 

In dismissing the appeal, the appellate court also asked all parties to maintain “status quo ante bellum” until the lower court ruled on the substantive suit.

In compliance with this court order, INEC said on Wednesday that it will not deal with any of the two factions of the party until the case at the Federal High Court is determined.

However, Mr Mark faulted the commission’s interpretation and decision, arguing there’s no basis for it.