ADC Delisting: “The Threat of a Pre-Signed Resignation Letter Did the Magic” — Odinkalu Alleges Pressure on INEC Chair

A governance controversy has intensified around the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) following its decision to adjust the recognition status of leaders of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), amid claims of external pressure on the Commission’s leadership.

INEC recently announced that it would remove Senator David Mark and former Osun State Governor Rauf Aregbesola from its official portal as leaders of the ADC, citing an ongoing legal dispute over the party’s leadership structure. The Commission also stated that it would suspend recognition of any faction within the party until the Federal High Court in Abuja delivers a final ruling.

The position was conveyed in a statement issued by Mohammed Kudu Haruna, INEC’s National Commissioner and Chairman of its Information and Voter Education Committee. The Commission said its action was guided by preservatory directions linked to an appeal involving Senator Mark and Nafiu Bala Gombe.

However, the development has triggered fresh debate over INEC’s independence and its role in interpreting judicial decisions.

Human rights lawyer and academic, Chidi Odinkalu, has alleged that the Commission’s decision was not taken in a vacuum. Writing on his social media account, he claimed that a series of high-level engagements involving INEC officials, the Presidency, and the judiciary preceded the announcement.

Odinkalu further alleged that INEC Chairman Joash Amupitan faced pressure linked to a pre-signed resignation letter reportedly held by influential actors. He described the alleged document as a tool used to influence recent actions taken by the Commission.

“The threat of a pre-signed resignation letter did the magic,” Odinkalu wrote, adding that the development raised concerns about how decisions are shaped at the highest levels of electoral administration.

He also questioned INEC’s decision to interpret a Court of Appeal ruling rather than returning to the court for clarification where ambiguity existed. According to him, a neutral electoral regulator would have sought judicial interpretation instead of issuing its own reading of the judgment.

Odinkalu warned that such practices, if left unchecked, could weaken institutional safeguards ahead of the 2027 general election cycle, raising broader concerns about the autonomy of democratic bodies.

INEC has not issued a direct response to the allegations as of the time of filing this report.