Factional National Chairman of Accord Party, Prof. Chris Imumolen, says his claim to the party’s leadership is anchored on valid judicial orders and internal party structures.
Imumolen, who made the clarification in a statement on Friday in Abuja, dismissed reports portraying his position as mere self-declaration.
The News Agency of Nigeria reports that factional chairman spoke against the backdrop of the ongoing leadership crisis arising from Accord’s July 2024 national convention, which produced competing claims between his faction and that of Maxwell Mgbudem.
He said that the legal foundation of his chairmanship was established on Aug. 29 and Aug. 30, 2024, when Justice M.M. Adamu of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory granted an interim order in Suit No. FCT/HC/M/11850/2024.
He said that the court explicitly directed Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to recognise him as the National Chairman of Accord, pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit.
“The court also restrained the defendants from parading themselves as the National Executive Committee of the party and from conducting state and local government congresses pending determination of the substantive matter,” Imumolen said.
Also Read: Accord party elects another flag bearer in Osun State
He added that the opposing faction subsequently challenged the ruling and relied on later court proceedings and orders.
“That means the Accord leadership question has remained contested and cannot responsibly be settled through political propaganda or unilateral declarations by either faction.
“Until the competent courts finally determine the competing claims, the proper approach is to distinguish between what has been judicially ordered, what has subsequently been challenged and what remains pending before the courts.
“Prof. Imumolen can therefore legitimately maintain that his claim to the national chairmanship has a clear judicial history and cannot be dismissed as a mere self-appointed position.
“The decisive evidence should ultimately be the certified court orders, judgments and enrolled orders from the FCT High Court, Federal High Court and Court of Appeal rather than statements issued by either faction of Accord,” he said.
He described as misleading any attempt to portray him as a self-appointed chairman, noting that his leadership enjoyed direct judicial recognition from the outset of the dispute.
While clarifying that the interim order was made pending the determination of the substantive dispute, Imumolen noted that having an interim order did not mean that the underlying dispute was erased, nor could it be dismissed as though it never existed.
On the claims that he was expelled from the party, Imumolen maintained that such assertions lacked legal weight, while the underlying leadership dispute remained before competent courts.
He argued that an allegation of expulsion does not, on its own, “determine who is legally entitled to occupy the position”.
Imumolen added that the legal effect of any purported expulsion must be determined by the party’s constitution, applicable electoral laws and court decisions.
According to him, his leadership enjoys substantial support among members of the National Working Committee (NWC), while acknowledging, however, that certified judgments remained the final authority.
Commenting on recent appellate proceedings, including the reported dismissal or striking out of an appeal filed by the opposing group in July 2026, Imumolen urged stakeholders to rely strictly on certified court records rather than political propaganda.
He emphasised that while appellate decisions were crucial, the precise legal impact depends on the certified judgment and enrolled orders of the court.
Reiterating his commitment to abiding by the final outcome of the legal battles, Imumolen expressed confidence that certified court records from the FCT High Court, Federal High Court and Court of Appeal would continue to vindicate his mandate.
NAN
