Stakeholders of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) in Anambra State have reacted to the Supreme Court ruling that restored the David Mark-led executive, expressing jubilation over the decision.
Speaking to Legit.ng, the stakeholders described the judgment as a victory for internal democracy and a crucial step for opposition restructuring ahead of the 2027 general elections. However, a constitutional lawyer noted that the crisis remains unresolved, as the court has returned the matter to the trial court without a final determination on the party's leadership.
Supreme Court Verdict Draws Mixed Reactions
The recent Supreme Court verdict, which reinstated the leadership of the major opposition party led by Senator David Mark, has been met with widespread celebrations in Anambra State. Party stakeholders hailed the decision as a landmark victory for justice, internal democracy, and party stability. They asserted that the ruling ensures authentic leadership is in place to guide the party toward the 2027 elections.
Foundation National Chairman Expresses Hope
Chief Ralph Nwosu (Ikolo Awka), the foundation national chairman of the party, spoke with Legit.ng in Awka on Friday, May 1. He described the verdict as a restoration of hope for the opposition and vindication against those who sought to hijack the ADC. Nwosu stated, "I formed this party in 2005, initially under the name 'Alliance for Democratic Change' before rebranding. It was registered by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) in 2006. Since then, I have made efforts and sacrificed a lot to make it a third force in Nigeria."
He explained that the recent leadership crisis in ADC was driven by a power struggle following a 2025 National Working Committee (NWC) overhaul, where a coalition led by David Mark was installed to align with political heavyweights for the 2027 elections. After his resignation as national chairman, a coalition supporting the 2027 presidential ambition adopted the ADC and appointed former Senate President David Mark as interim leader in July 2025.
Nwosu added, "Nafiu Bala, a former deputy national chairman of our party, rejected the new leadership, claiming the reorganisation was an illegal hijack that disregarded the party's constitution, which he argued mandated his succession. As founder and father of this party, I have made efforts to broker peace, but in the midst of the whole thing, I was seeing the voice of Jacob and the hand of Esau. But today, the Supreme Court has solved the puzzle, and all of us, who are lovers of democracy, are happy."
Ex-Deputy Governorship Candidate Expresses Confidence
In an exclusive interview with Legit.ng on Saturday, May 2, former deputy governorship candidate of the party in Anambra, Ndubisi Nwobu, noted that the Supreme Court ruling will enable the party to move forward with confidence and purpose. He said the restoration of the Mark-led executive, which includes Rauf Aregbesola, will be crucial to preventing the party from being incapacitated during the 2027 general elections. "Today, therefore, I invite many more Nigerian political figures to join the party. Presently, we have a strengthened, unified ADC," he added.
Lawyer Says Crisis Still Unresolved
Meanwhile, constitutional lawyer Barr. Damian Ibah said that despite the Supreme Court ruling, the ADC crisis is far from over. Speaking with Legit.ng on Saturday, May 2, Ibah noted that the ruling may appear like a decisive victory for the opposition party, but a closer look shows the crisis is far from resolved. He explained that although the Supreme Court set aside the Court of Appeal's order on maintaining status quo ante bellum, it did not give a final ruling on the leadership dispute. Instead, it directed the parties to return to the trial court, leaving the question of legitimate leadership unresolved.
ADC Lawyers React to Supreme Court Ruling
Previously, Legit.ng reported that lawyers to a faction of the ADC reacted to the Supreme Court judgment on the party's leadership dispute involving David Mark and other stakeholders. The legal team noted that while the apex court dismissed six out of seven grounds of appeal, it only partially upheld one issue relating to the status quo ante bellum. They argued that the substantive matter was not finally decided.
