Nigeria’s Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has disowned a social media poster claiming it reaffirmed the leadership of Senator David Mark for the African Democratic Congress (ADC).
In a statement dated November 6, INEC said the poster and accompanying text did not originate from the Commission.
The fake publication used INEC’s logo and an image of National Commissioner Mohammed Haruna without authorisation, the Commission said.
INEC stressed that it had issued no reaffirmation of Mark’s position as ADC leader.
It urged the public to disregard the publication and rely on information from its official, verified channels.
The notice addresses a claim circulating online amid renewed legal uncertainty over the opposition party’s leadership.
The Commission’s statement rejects the poster’s authenticity; it does not announce a new decision on which ADC faction it recognises.
The clarification was reported Friday by Nigerian media, which reproduced the substance of INEC’s warning.
What the Fake Publication Claimed About David Mark
The poster reportedly claimed INEC had “reaffirmed” a David Mark-led leadership after the latest court judgment.
Its use of the Commission’s branding and a commissioner’s photograph could make the claim appear official to readers.
INEC did not identify who created the poster or say how widely it had circulated.
The Commission’s warning focused on attribution: the material was not issued by INEC, and the image use was unauthorised.
It advised readers to disregard the poster “in its entirety,” rather than treat it as a genuine update.
The announcement did not state whether INEC had referred the matter to law enforcement or begun an investigation.
Nor did it provide further details about when the poster first appeared or which social media accounts shared it.
The Commission’s advice was to check official channels before relying on claims about its actions.
Clarification Follows Court Ruling
The fake claim emerged one day after a Federal High Court judgment affecting the ADC leadership and its 2027 candidates.
On November 5, Justice Peter Lifu ruled against the David Mark-led party leadership in a suit brought by Nafiu Bala Gombe.
Lifu invalidated the leadership structure and decisions taken under it, including the process that produced Atiku Abubakar as the party’s presidential candidate.
The court also directed INEC not to recognise decisions taken at the party’s July 2025 national executive meeting.
The ruling therefore made the Commission’s position especially sensitive, as questions about party recognition affect election preparations.
However, INEC’s denial of the poster should not be read as a separate ruling on the judgment’s legal effect.
It simply stated that the claimed reaffirmation was not an announcement made by the Commission.
The scope and consequences of Lifu’s orders remain matters for the parties and courts to address.
ADC David Mark Leadership Contested in Court
The ADC dispute has produced competing legal developments, with party factions advancing different interpretations of court decisions.
In July, Justice Musa Liman dismissed a separate suit challenging Mark’s leadership, finding that the case raised internal party issues.
Liman also ruled that the leadership transition complied with party rules and directed INEC to recognise the Mark-led national officers.
The ADC has cited that earlier ruling in objecting to Lifu’s November decision, arguing that it conflicts with the later judgment.
The two cases involved different claimants, and the precise legal relationship between their decisions remains contested.
Atiku and the ADC say they will challenge Lifu’s ruling through the appeal process and seek appropriate interim relief.
Nafiu Bala Gombe, who brought the latest suit, has welcomed the judgment as affirming compliance with party rules.
INEC’s fake-poster notice did not settle these competing claims or say that Mark had been reinstated.
The Commission’s earlier official position and its response to the false poster are distinct from the judicial process now underway.
Why INEC’s Clarification Matters
Election bodies depend on accurate public information, particularly when party leadership and candidate nominations are under legal challenge.
A false statement attributed to INEC can confuse party members, voters, journalists and election stakeholders.
Misusing an institutional logo may also lend credibility to claims that the institution has not made.
In this case, the false poster suggested a specific outcome on ADC leadership that the Commission explicitly denied issuing.
That distinction is important because INEC’s public statements can affect how parties interpret compliance obligations and prepare for elections.
The Commission’s message leaves readers to consult official channels rather than screenshots or unattributed graphics.
The warning does not establish who created the poster, why it was made, or whether it was deliberately designed to mislead.
Those questions would require evidence beyond the clarification issued by INEC.
For now, the Commission says the publication is fake and has not reaffirmed the Mark-led leadership.
What the Commission Has and Has Not Said
INEC has denied making the specific statement circulated in the poster and said its branding was used without permission.
It has not, in that clarification, issued a fresh public ruling affirming either faction’s claim to ADC leadership.
The Commission also has not said that the fake publication changes the status of the Federal High Court judgment.
Legal appeals, any stay applications and subsequent court orders may affect what INEC is required to do.
Until those processes produce further direction, readers should avoid treating the fake poster as evidence of Commission action.
The party’s leadership dispute remains unresolved in public reporting, while legal challenges continue.
The immediate confirmed development is narrower: INEC says it did not issue the claimed reaffirmation.
The Commission’s advice is to verify future notices through its official, verified communication channels.
