Keyamo on Nullification of Atiku’s Candidacy: Justice May Be Slow, But It Is Always Sure

Minister of Aviation and Aerospace Development, Festus Keyamo, has welcomed the Federal High Court judgment nullifying the David Mark-led leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and invalidating decisions taken under the disputed leadership, including the nomination of former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar as the party’s presidential candidate for the 2027 general election.

Keyamo reacted to the ruling in a post on X on Thursday, November 5, 2026, declaring: “Justice may be slow, but it is always SURE!”

The minister argued that the law should be determined by facts and evidence rather than political sentiments, public outrage or the consequences of a court decision for individual political ambitions.

In his reaction, Keyamo accused the Mark-led faction of taking control of the ADC without obtaining the necessary approval from the party’s recognised organs.

He maintained that a political party’s internal procedures and constitution must be respected, insisting that those who disregard established rules cannot blame the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) for the legal consequences.

“Sorry, but the law is decided on facts and evidence, rather than sentiments and outrage by a group of people,” Keyamo stated.

The minister also rejected suggestions that the judgment represented a threat to democracy simply because it affected Atiku’s presidential ambition.

According to him, the ADC is an established political party with members and original leaders whose interests should also be recognised.

“It is not only when a certain ATIKU ABUBAKAR contest the Presidency that democracy is in danger,” he added.

Why the court nullified Atiku’s ADC ticket

Keyamo’s comments followed a judgment delivered by Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja in a suit instituted by Nafiu Bala Gombe, a former ADC Deputy National Chairman for the North-East.

The case, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, challenged the process through which former Senate President David Mark and other members of the caretaker leadership assumed control of the party.

Gombe argued that following the resignation of the ADC’s former National Chairman, Ralph Nwosu, he was entitled to assume the party’s leadership under its internal arrangements.

He challenged the emergence of Mark as National Chairman and Rauf Aregbesola as National Secretary, arguing that the process violated the party’s constitution and relevant legal requirements.

Justice Lifu upheld the plaintiff’s case and declared the Mark-led caretaker committee unlawful.

The court consequently invalidated decisions taken under the disputed leadership, including the process that produced Atiku as the ADC’s presidential candidate. The ruling also affected the party’s other national officers and candidates nominated for the 2027 elections.

The judgment has created uncertainty around the ADC’s preparations for the forthcoming general election and the status of candidates who emerged through the nullified arrangements.

Atiku and ADC reject the judgment

Atiku and the ADC have rejected the implications of the ruling and indicated that they will challenge it at the Court of Appeal.

The former Vice-President accused the ruling party of attempting to weaken the opposition and frustrate his presidential ambition.

His camp also questioned the timing of the judgment, which came shortly after his campaign activities in Sokoto State.

The ADC has maintained that it will pursue the matter through the judicial process, setting the stage for another round of legal proceedings over the party’s leadership and its 2027 electoral plans.

What happens next?

The immediate question is whether the Court of Appeal will uphold, reverse or vary the Federal High Court’s decision.

Until the appeal process produces a further judicial determination, the dispute remains a developing legal and political issue. The ruling should therefore not be interpreted as a final Supreme Court decision on Atiku’s eligibility to contest the 2027 presidential election.

The dispute also raises broader questions about internal party democracy, leadership succession, compliance with party constitutions and the role of the courts in resolving political party disputes.

For Keyamo, the judgment reinforces his argument that political parties must follow their own rules and that court decisions should be assessed on the evidence and applicable law.

However, the ADC and Atiku have made clear that they intend to contest the ruling through the appellate process.

The eventual outcome will have implications not only for Atiku’s presidential ticket but also for the ADC’s leadership structure and the status of its other candidates ahead of the 2027 general election.