By Collins Opurozor
Yesterday, on Arise News, I watched Dr. Sam Amadi discuss the crisis rocking the opposition African Democratic Congress (ADC). He spoke as an analyst and as Director of the Abuja School of Social and Political Thought. These roles demand rigor and honesty. They require that every claim be rooted in verifiable facts.
Analysis is not guesswork. It is a disciplined and scientific exercise. It begins with facts and ends with logical conclusions. As Appadorai rightly noted, “the classification of facts and formulation upon that basis of absolute judgments which are consistent and universally valid sums up the essence of modern science.” Anything outside this standard is not analysis. It is propaganda.
Amadi made a claim that deserves interrogation. He suggested that Nafiu Bala Gombe, the man at the center of the ADC logjam, apart from his contested resignation, was part of the National Working Committee (NWC) dissolved by the National Executive Committee (NEC). That statement is not supported by the constitution of the ADC. It introduces confusion into an already sensitive issue.
Section 13 of the ADC Constitution does not grant the NEC the power to dissolve the NWC. That authority is clearly reserved for the National Convention under Section 16. The language is direct and leaves no room for ambiguity. Only the National Convention can elect, remove or dissolve the NWC or any of its members.
This means that any attempt by the NEC to remove Bala Gombe is null and void. It has no legal foundation within the party’s own framework. Such an action cannot stand. It is important that public commentators understand this before making definitive claims.
Beyond the immediate legal issue, this controversy opens a wider window into the internal character of many briefcase political parties in Nigeria. Too often, these parties are built not as democratic institutions but as instruments of control. Their constitutions are carefully drafted to concentrate power around a coterie of perpetual owners, limit internal accountability, and shield leadership from routine institutional checks. What appears on paper as a collective structure often functions in practice as a tightly managed hierarchy.
In such environments, the distinction between party ownership and party leadership becomes blurred. Figures like Ralph Okey Nwosu, as long-standing national chairman, exemplify how founders can entrench themselves through constitutional design. By ensuring that only a National Convention can remove any member of the National Working Committee, and by making such conventions almost impossible to convene without him, the structure effectively secures his dominance. The NEC, despite being a proper organ in internal party disciplinary issues, is thereby reduced to an administrative body without real disciplinary authority over the NWC.
It is against this backdrop that the current struggle involving David Mark and his associates must be properly situated. The attempt to reposition the ADC as a viable coalition platform ahead of 2027 has manifestly collided with the entrenched legal architecture of the party. Bringing in a new leadership bloc without first navigating the deliberately planted landmines and cumbersome constitutional requirements, especially the necessity of a properly convened National Convention, has inevitably produced resistance, disputes, and litigations, including that of Bala Gombe.
The crisis, therefore, is not accidental. It is the predictable outcome of bypassing due process in a system already designed to resist abrupt change. If the group around David Mark had pursued a structured transition: engaging the Ralph Okey Nwosu-led NWC, working through the NEC only within its lawful limits, and ultimately submitting to a legitimate National Convention ab initio, the present turmoil could have been avoided. But instead of admitting and problematizing the flawed processes of the attempted transition, the incipient ADC managers are always eager to shift culpability to the APC-led Federal Government. This is very unfortunate! Shortcuts in party governance almost always end in institutional conflict.
This is why analysts like Sam Amadi must be careful and precise. When he attributes powers to the NEC that it clearly does not possess under Sections 13 and 16 of the ADC Constitution, he misleads the public and distorts the legal reality of the crisis. At a time when Nigerians are seeking clarity, not confusion, public intellectuals must resist the urge to speculate or align with interests. They must stay with the facts, the law, and the truth.
