One of our leaders, while addressing the workers of the church on Sunday, wondered aloud why a party that “controls 35 governors” would be planning to annihilate another party. This leader, a complete gentleman, didn’t name the political parties under reference, but he had already said: “They want to stop Atiku (Abubakar) from contesting next year’s election.” So, I had a fair idea of what this leader of ours was talking about.
Not that I agreed with what this leader said, primarily because of the mix-up in his presentation, but when you are in a church service, you need to ‘respect yourself’. I quietly kept my opinion to myself as ‘oversabi’; no matter how well-articulated, it has a way of fetching one an unnecessary backlash in such a setting. Remember the wise saying, ‘silence is golden’. I agree.
Coincidentally, my first exposure to democracy was in a Baptist church, a church with a strong American foundation and well-established democratic tenets. Without being conscious of it, we were co-opted into the concept of popular decision-making through voting or affirmation on every decision the church had to make, from major projects to repairs on the pastor’s residence or office and his official travels. I don’t know if this practice remains the same in the church to this day, having moved ahead over 30 years ago.
You may wish to ignore, at least for now, that democracy is facing a serious existential threat in Baptist Church’s foundation country under a now sobering Uncle Don, especially in the run-up to the United States Midterms elections when serial polls suggested that the Republicans were likely in for a surprise. Somehow, even the polls didn’t indicate a total political rout.
You may equally decide to brush aside the feeling that the US is one nation, which consistently reminds you of the 1986 Fela Anikulapo’s classic, ‘Teacher Don’t Teach Me Nonsense’. In it, the Abami Eda satirically mocks the teachings of popular preachers of democracy and the teachers’ penchant for double-dealing—preaching one thing but justifying the opposite when it satisfies their fantasies. No be politicians dey run am?
In those beautiful years, long before Nigeria migrated into descending auto-pilot, your top priority while heading for church service on a Sunday might not include what to eat on your return. How to get money to send your children or wards to that expensive private school you couldn’t afford (some are owned by churches) would not be a constant headache then. Getting a manageable job for your freshly-minted graduate (even secondary school leavers) might not top your few prayer requests. Today, the self-inflicted situation in our dear land is clear enough even for the blind to feel.
The focus of our contemplation today isn’t the democratic practices of any church, an individual or its fabled origin in the US, by the way. If a well-educated leader in an organisation or group could pass across a piece of information about a development in the country without proper context, one may wonder about the millions of others whose opinions are formed by what the leader says on a subject matter.
The delicate, or very sensitive, case of the sacking of the David Mark-led executive of the African Democratic Congress and the fallout from the court ruling has once again exposed how we jump on a matter based on sentiment rather than facts.
I have since found out, not too long ago, that political sentiments and laid-down regulations or laws are actually siblings in Nigeria.
In preparation for the 2015 decisive elections, the Action Congress of Nigeria, the Congress for Progressive Change, the All Nigeria Peoples Party, a faction of the All Progressive Grand Alliance (led by ex-governor Rochas Okorocha), and five aggrieved governors of the Peoples Democratic Party teamed up in 2013 to truncate PDP’s dream of ruling Nigeria for 60 years. This initiative resulted in the birth of the All Progressives Congress, which eventually won the 2015 presidential election. The APC registered as a distinct political party while planning to upstage an established political hegemony.
Conversely, when aggrieved politicians of all shades came together, albeit belatedly in 2025, to forge a common front to challenge the APC, one of the platforms they were accommodated on was the ADC. It was clearly too late to follow the APC template of 2013 by registering a new party. Former Vice President Atiku, former Senate President Mark, and former Minister of Transport, Rotimi Amaechi, were among the top guns of the new emerging force.
One of the hurdles to scale for these heavyweights, however, was how to take over the leadership of the ADC headed by Chief Ralph Nwosu, who willingly resigned to make way for the new kids on the opposition block. Mark emerged as the caretaker National Chairman, while former Osun State Governor, Rauf Aregbesola, emerged as the caretaker National Secretary, both emerging without an election at a validly convened convention of the party, owing largely to the speed required to hit the ground running immediately.
One Bala Gombe, who happened to be Nwosu’s deputy (North-East), disagreed with the ‘takeover’ of the party and headed for court, contending that he was supposed to take over as the National Chairman of the party after Nwosu’s resignation, according to the constitution of the party and the Electoral Act. In the suit, FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, at the Federal High Court, Abuja, Gombe challenged the process by which the Mark-led committee took control of the party exco, asking the court to nullify all actions taken on the party’s behalf by that leadership.
While the Mark-led exco hit the ground running by putting structures in place, Gombe was perfecting his documents at the Abuja court to orchestrate a political ambush. Ordinarily, the party’s new caretaker leaders did not pay much attention to Gombe, whom they claimed had resigned alongside Nwosu. The said Gombe claimed his signature on the ‘resignation letter’ was forged. Politicians, being what they are, you hardly know the status of the claims.
There is a need to note that neither APC nor the Presidency is a party to the suit. The Independent National Electoral Commission, which oversees party registration, primaries and elections, is one of the defendants in Gombe’s suit. It is also important to note that the judge, sitting over the case, can only make decisions based on the facts before him, in line with the Electoral Act.
If a friend, who ran into accommodation problems in a Nigerian city after getting married, was offered a lifeline as a squatter in your extra room, his newborn Kolawole or Igwe becomes a squatter from the day the mother returns to the friend’s home from the hospital. The well-set, six-pack father cannot suddenly assume ownership of the apartment on account of his muscular prowess. They will maintain their dignified status as squatters.
In the same vein, it is basically illegal for a gang to buy into any political group or setup without following the laid-down rules in the constitution of the party or the Electoral Act. If this happens, a metaphorical Gombe may be waiting for you in the days to come. Nation-building, an indispensable ingredient in development, cannot be achieved on the altar of illegality or by asking a judge to bow to sentimental absurdities.
Notably, Atiku is not a defendant in Gombe’s suit. The Mark-led exco, which conducted the primaries that gave birth to Atiku’s candidacy as the ADC standard bearer, is one of the defendants.
It follows that Justice Peter Lifu’s judgement is not about the former vice president but the ADC exco. Having established a ground for the sacking of the caretaker committee of the party according to the prayer of the suit, it becomes mandatory that Atiku’s candidacy becomes null and void because the now ‘illegal’ Mark exco conducted the ‘illegal’ presidential primary.
Trying to crucify Justice Lifu for his ruling on the ADC exco case before him is tantamount to hanging the judge for doing his job. Selling the narrative that the former law lecturer sacked Atiku from the 2027 presidential election amounts to reputational blackmail, misleading and sentimental arm-twisting.
One of the most critical questions popping up in your heart equally remains unanswered in my head. At what point did ‘negotiations’ become complicated between the takeover gang and the sit-tight occupiers? If this part had been taken care of, this suit wouldn’t have existed in the first place. Please don’t ask me any ‘JAMB questions’ on this because I won’t answer them.
Is it not strange that politicians, who could muster enough resources to buy party delegates in different presidential primaries consistently in hard currencies, suddenly find it complicated to settle a few individuals in a party exco before the case gets to a court? Is this a template for how to govern 230 million Nigerians?
Issuing deadly threats of setting the nation on fire if a candidate is not on the ballot is at best puerile and infantile. Peace-loving members of the APC, PDP, National Democratic Congress and other mushrooming political parties are equal stakeholders in the Nigerian project who can’t be intimidated or boxed into a corner because a member of the ruling elite, who traditionally refuses to obey laid down rules, is not on the ballot. What audacity? The finger that sins is the one the king will cut off.
I have not claimed that I don’t understand how delicate this Gombish suit is, especially with just two months and one week to the presidential election. Who says this case can’t be settled before the January 16 election? This is necessary to ensure a level playing field for all contestants who must also learn how to comply with the law of the land, not when it suits them.
We will consistently struggle to make progress as a nation if, when we are expected to take dispassionate positions on critical issues, we focus on sentimental illogicalities, false narratives, and misrepresentations rather than the meat of the matter.