Those who make peaceful change impossible, make violent change inevitable” – John F. Kennedy
On the evening of April 1, 2026, perhaps fittingly, on April Fools’ Day, the Independent National Electoral Commission issued a statement that sent shockwaves through Nigeria’s political landscape. INEC announced that it would no longer recognise the David Mark-led National Working Committee of the African Democratic Congress, citing a court ruling surrounding the national leadership of the party. In one fell swoop, the commission effectively paralysed the only credible opposition platform that had emerged ahead of the 2027 general elections.
INEC’s defenders will point to the Court of Appeal’s directive to “maintain the status quo ante bellum.” But a careful reading of events reveals something far more troubling than a neutral electoral body deferring to judicial authority. What Nigerians are witnessing is the systematic weaponisation of institutional power against political opposition, and the ADC crisis is only the latest, most brazen chapter in that story.
The Anatomy of a Setup
The ADC had been emerging as a major opposition platform, with several prominent politicians aligning with the party. A coalition led by Atiku Abubakar adopted the ADC in July 2025 as a vehicle to challenge President Bola Tinubu in the 2027 general election, with key figures including Peter Obi and Rabiu Kwankwaso, who placed second, third, and fourth, respectively, in the 2023 presidential race, joining the platform. That context is everything. The moment the ADC became a credible threat to the Tinubu re-election project, the machinery of state moved against it.
According to David Mark, the new leadership emerged from a NEC meeting convened on July 29, 2025, which was monitored by INEC officials themselves. The dissolution of the previous National Working Committee and the ratification of a caretaker committee headed by Mark and Rauf Aregbesola as National Secretary was formally communicated to INEC, which subsequently published the updated leadership details on its portal. INEC did not just observe this process, it validated it. The commission’s sudden reversal, months later, raises the question: what changed, other than the political stakes?
Mark further noted that Nafiu Bala Gombe, the individual whose court action triggered the crisis, had resigned his position as Vice National Chairman on May 17, 2025, a full two months before the July NEC meeting, and that this resignation was duly transmitted to INEC on August 12, 2025. A man who resigned from his position approached a court four months after that resignation seeking to be made chairman of the party he had abandoned. That this claim has been allowed to hold an entire opposition party hostage, with INEC’s apparent cooperation, stretches the limits of credulity.
The Pattern Is the Message
The ADC’s National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, accused INEC of acting under pressure from the Federal Government, which he described as “jittery” over the ADC’s growing influence. This accusation did not emerge in a vacuum. It fits a pattern that Nigerians have watched unfold with grim familiarity.
The PDP, once dominant, has been riven by a factional crisis that conveniently deepened as 2027 approached. The Labour Party, which mobilised millions of young Nigerians behind Peter Obi in 2023, has been engulfed in an internal war that has sapped its momentum. The NNPP faces similar turbulence. And now the ADC, the one platform that had managed to unite the major opposition figures around a single vehicle, finds itself legally hobbled just as it was building real political steam.
To dismiss all of this as coincidence requires a suspension of political intelligence that most Nigerians simply cannot afford.
US-based professor and columnist Farooq Kperogi warned that the decision could signal a dangerous erosion of democratic competition ahead of the 2027 elections, arguing that the electoral body’s decision suggests an attempt to weaken opposition parties and comparing the situation to the Abacha era’s suffocation of competitive electoral politics. When respected scholars begin invoking Abacha, it is time for every Nigerian, regardless of political affiliation, to pay attention.
INEC’s Credibility in the Balance
The commission’s justification, that it is merely complying with a Court of Appeal directive to maintain the status quo, does not withstand scrutiny. Mark accused INEC of misinterpreting that directive by withdrawing recognition from both factions, a move that effectively left the party without acknowledged leadership. The court did not create a leadership vacuum; INEC chose to create one. There is a material difference between not recognising a disputed faction and refusing to recognise anyone at all, leaving a major opposition party functionally headless in the run-up to elections.
Mark warned that the decision could disrupt the party’s preparations for upcoming elections in Osun and Ekiti states, as well as its scheduled internal congresses and national convention in April 2026. This is not a minor administrative hiccup. This is a party being prevented from organising, mobilising, and preparing for elections, which is precisely the point.
An electoral commission that cannot be trusted to be neutral is not a neutral body. It is a political weapon. And a political weapon wielded by an incumbent president against his opponents is not electoral administration, it is electoral manipulation.
The Dangers Ahead
Nigeria’s political history offers sobering lessons about what happens when citizens lose faith in democratic institutions. When people believe that elections are predetermined, that the system is rigged at the institutional level, and that peaceful political change is impossible, they do not simply accept the verdict. They look for other means.
A human rights lawyer, Inibehe Effiong, criticised INEC over its decision, alleging a plot to undermine credible elections ahead of 2027 and warning of a “well-orchestrated sinister conspiracy” to truncate a transparent electoral process. These are not the words of fringe voices. They reflect a widespread anxiety about where Nigeria is heading.
President John F. Kennedy’s warning rings with uncomfortable relevance here: those who make peaceful change impossible make violent change inevitable. Nigeria is a country with deep reserves of frustration, economic hardship, rising inequality, mass unemployment, and dashed expectations. The Tinubu administration’s record on the economy has only deepened that frustration. If the political system is also seen as irredeemably rigged, the consequences could be far more dangerous than any election result.
The Way Forward
INEC must be reminded that its mandate is to conduct free, fair, and credible elections, not to manage political outcomes on behalf of any administration. The commission’s chairman must immediately clarify the legal basis for effectively leaving the ADC leaderless, and must commit to a transparent, time-bound resolution that allows the party to function as a political entity pending the court’s determination.
Beyond INEC, Nigeria’s judiciary must demonstrate that it cannot be instrumentalised. Civil society, the media, and the international community must keep a watchful eye on these developments. The 2027 elections must not be decided before a single vote is cast.
The ADC crisis is a test, not just of one party’s survival, but of whether Nigeria’s democracy is real or merely performative. The answer will determine far more than who occupies Aso Rock in 2027. It may determine whether there is a peaceful Nigeria left to govern at all.
Kunle Oshobi is the Head of Strategy and Planning of The Narrative Force
