The Adamawa ADC Crisis and Nigeria’s Test of Internal Democracy

By Salingo B Adamu

As Nigeria edges closer to the 2027 general elections, a political drama in Adamawa State has become more than a local party affair. It has become a national test of whether votes still matter in our democracy. At the center of it is *Omar Suleiman*, the candidate duly elected by the African Democratic Congress, ADC, to contest the governorship of Adamawa State.

The facts of the primary election are not contested. When ADC delegates in Adamawa voted, Suleiman secured a landslide victory with *143,216 votes*. His closest rival, *Hamman Tukur Modibbo*, polled *56,801 votes*. Another aspirant, *Ishaya Inuwa Durkwa*, got *20,343 votes*. The margin was decisive. The people spoke.

Yet months after that exercise, there are strong indications of moves within the party to discard that result and substitute Suleiman’s name. The reason, many believe, has nothing to do with competence, popularity, or capacity to win. It has everything to do with power, control, and the fear of a new political order.

To understand why Suleiman is being targeted, one must look at what he represents. He is not a product of the traditional political machinery that has determined who governs Adamawa for decades. He did not emerge from the usual backroom arrangements in Yola or Abuja.

Part of the problem, according to party insiders, is his association with the *Gongola People’s Forum*. The forum was formed by various ethnic nationalities in the old Gongola area to push back against the dominance of a few feudal families in the politics and economy of Adamawa. For daring to stand with marginalized communities, Suleiman is now being labeled as “anti-establishment.”

Another issue is his background. Suleiman hails from Hong Local Government Area and speaks the same dialect as former Secretary to the Government of the Federation, *Babachir David Lawal*. Babachir was once ADC’s National Vice Chairman for the North East before he had a fallout with the party’s 2027 presidential candidate. In the eyes of some party leaders, that connection alone is enough to disqualify Suleiman, regardless of the votes he got.

His ethnicity is also being used against him. As a Huba man from Hong, Suleiman comes from one of the minority groups in Adamawa that have historically been shut out of the governorship. To the gatekeepers of power in the state, a Huba governor disrupts a carefully guarded arrangement.

Those who have worked with him also point to his record. During his tenure as head of a federal agency under the Nigerian Ports Authority, Suleiman earned a reputation for insisting on due process. In a political environment where loyalty often trumps law, that trait has been described by opponents as “stubbornness.”
This explains why the name being pushed to replace him is that of Hamman Tukur Modibbo — the same aspirant that delegates rejected at the primary. Sources allege that Modibbo enjoys the backing of influential figures within the ADC at both state and national levels, including allies of the party’s presidential flag bearer for 2027.

If that substitution goes through, the damage will go beyond Adamawa. It will send a message to every party member in Nigeria that primaries are meaningless. That no matter how many votes you get, a few people in a room can cancel it.

Thankfully, the law offers some protection. The *2026 Electoral Act* contains clear provisions prohibiting the arbitrary replacement of candidates who emerged through valid party primaries. The provision was designed to stop exactly this kind of impunity and to protect the integrity of the ballot.

Suleiman has already approached the courts to enforce his mandate. The judiciary now has a chance to reaffirm a simple principle: that the votes of party members must be respected and that political parties must be bound by their own constitutions and by the laws of the land.

The implications for the ADC are also national. The party is positioning itself as a credible alternative ahead of 2027. But it cannot preach internal democracy to Nigerians while practicing imposition within its own ranks. To discard 143,000 votes in Adamawa would severely undermine the party’s moral authority nationwide.

For Adamawa, the stakes are even higher. The state is one of Nigeria’s most diverse, with over 80 ethnic groups. For too long, governance has been seen as the exclusive preserve of a few. Suleiman’s emergence offered a sense of inclusion to communities that have long felt on the margins.

His supporters argue that what Adamawa needs now is not another governor who will govern by proxy. The state needs a leader who understands rural poverty, the collapse of public schools, the decay in primary healthcare, and the security challenges in the northern part of the state. They believe Suleiman fits that bill.

This is ultimately about precedent. If a political party can ignore the outcome of its own primary because a candidate is not “acceptable” to a few powerful individuals, then no election in Nigeria is safe. What happens in Adamawa today can happen in Benue tomorrow, in Kano next week, in any state.

The ADC leadership therefore faces a defining moment. It can choose to stand with democracy, with its constitution, and with the 143,216 people who voted. Or it can choose the path of imposition and risk a backlash that could cost the party dearly in 2027.

So, who is afraid of Omar Suleiman? Those who are afraid of a Nigeria where your LGA does not determine your destiny. Those who are afraid of a politics where votes count more than connections. Those who are afraid that power may finally return to the people.

Adamawa delegates have made their choice. The law is clear. Democracy demands that the will of the people be respected. Anything less will be a betrayal — not just of Omar Suleiman, but of every Nigerian who still believes in the power of the ballot.

Salingo B Adamu is a public affairs analyst based in Jimeta Yola.

—