Former Kogi West senator Dino Melaye has disputed claims that a Federal High Court ruling on the African Democratic Congress (ADC) leadership crisis directly affects former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar’s presidential ambition, saying the judgment does not mention him or any other aspirant.
Titiansloaded reports that Melaye made the clarification on Wednesday, November 11, 2026, after the ADC obtained the certified true copy of the judgment delivered by Justice Peter Lifu.
The former lawmaker said a review of the court document showed that Atiku’s name was absent, challenging interpretations suggesting that the ruling had specifically addressed his political future ahead of the 2027 general elections.
In a post on X, Melaye announced that the party had received the certified copy and insisted that it contained no reference to Atiku or any other presidential candidate.
He also accused the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) of spreading misinformation over the implications of the court decision, declaring that the opposition figure remained in the race.
The controversy stems from a November 5 ruling by Justice Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja, which set aside the leadership structure of the ADC headed by former Senate President David Mark.
The court also nullified actions taken under the disputed leadership, including steps connected to the process through which Atiku emerged as the party’s presidential candidate.
The decision generated uncertainty within the opposition party over its leadership and preparations for the 2027 elections. The ADC rejected the ruling and approached the Court of Appeal to challenge it.
However, the release of the certified judgment became another point of dispute, with party members accusing the court of delaying access to the document despite applications by their lawyers and payment of the necessary fees.
Former Rivers State governor Rotimi Amaechi had raised the issue during an appearance on Channels Television’s Sunrise Daily on Tuesday.
Amaechi alleged that the judge had failed to make the judgment available to the party, arguing that the delay was preventing the ADC from proceeding with its appeal.
The delivery of the certified copy has now provided the party with the document it needs to examine the court’s reasoning and pursue its legal challenge.
Melaye’s statement, however, represents his interpretation of the judgment’s contents and does not, by itself, determine the legal consequences of the ruling for the ADC’s leadership or its presidential selection process.
