The dire consequences of abusing ADC constitution as exemplified in Adamawa
By Usman Garba Santuraki
Opposition political parties, play very crucial roles in not only shaping the future of their countries but ensuring checks and balances and in most cases redirecting the ruling party back to line whenever it falters.
But when an opposition political party is the one changing the rules of the game to suit the personal proclivities of some strong men, the consequences may be dire. What is happening in Adamawa State chapter of African Democratic Congress (ADC) in which Babachir David Lawal is single handledly abusing the party’s constitution and craftily combining roles functions and responsibilities of all committees in one is a serious travesty that call for the concern of all lovers of democracy.
Let us examine the issues:
1. Constitutional and Procedural Violation
The ADC Constitution and Transition Guidelines clearly outline distinct committees, mandates, and terms of reference for each structure.
If the Transition Steering Committee assumes the powers of the other two, it breaches the principle of separation of functions and violates the spirit and letter of the ADC constitution.
Such action can be legally challenged before the National Working Committee (NWC), National Executive Committee (NEC), or even in court as a case of procedural illegality and abuse of process.
2. Concentration of Power
Combining all powers into a single committee means unchecked control of:
Party administration and decision-making (Caretaker’s role),
Membership registration and data (MMRR’s role),
Transitional oversight and reconciliation (Steering role).
This creates a dictatorial structure, undermines internal democracy, and erodes transparency and accountability.
3. Distortion of ADC’s Power Balance
ADC is structured on a coalition and alliance principle, where different blocs and interests are represented.
Having only one committee usurp others’ roles disenfranchises certain blocs, marginalizes loyal stakeholders, and disrupts the power-sharing equilibrium meant to ensure inclusion and trust.
This could cause internal rebellion, defections, or parallel structures emerging within the state chapter.
4. Loss of Legitimacy and Credibility
The Caretaker and MMRR committees are supposed to perform specific transitional and organizational functions leading to congresses.
If one committee hijacks everything, its actions — from appointments to membership registration — can be deemed illegitimate and subject to nullification by the national leadership.
Consequently, any congress or election arising from such an arrangement can be invalidated as constitutionally defective.
5. Political Consequences
Stakeholders will lose confidence in the process, leading to factionalism and disunity ahead of the congress.
The state chapter will appear compromised and weak, giving rival parties and internal opponents a propaganda advantage.
It could also undermine national confidence in the state’s readiness for democratic leadership transition.
6. Best Practice Recommendation
To maintain legality, balance, and transparency:
1. Constitute all three committees distinctly — each with defined membership, terms of reference, and tenure.
2. Ensure clear boundaries between administrative (Caretaker), transitional oversight (Steering), and mobilization (MMRR) functions.
3. The Transition Steering Committee should only coordinate and supervise — not execute — the other committees’ duties.
4. The NWC/National Secretariat should ratify and monitor compliance to prevent abuse of authority at state level.
Santuraki writes from Jimeta.
