Factional National Chairman of Accord, Prof. Chris Imumolen, has defended his claim to the leadership of the party, saying his position is anchored on valid judicial orders and established internal party structures, rather than a self-declaration.
Imumolen made the clarification in a statement issued on Friday in Abuja amid the continuing leadership crisis in Accord arising from its July 2024 national convention, which produced competing claims to the party’s national chairmanship between his faction and that of Maxwell Mgbudem.
He said the legal foundation of his chairmanship was established on August 29 and 30, 2024, when Justice M.M. Adamu of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, granted an interim order in Suit No. FCT/HC/M/11850/2024.
According to Imumolen, the court directed the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to recognise him as National Chairman of Accord pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit.
He added that 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.
“The court also restrained the defendants from parading themselves as the National Executive Committee of the party and restrained them from conducting state and local government congresses pending determination of the substantive matter,” Imumolen said.
He acknowledged, however, that the opposing faction subsequently challenged his position 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,” he said.
Imumolen urged stakeholders to distinguish between orders that have been issued by the courts, subsequent challenges to those orders and matters that remain pending before the judiciary.
“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,” he said.
He argued that his position could therefore not be accurately described as that of a self-appointed chairman, given the judicial history surrounding his claim.
“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,” he said.
According to him, the decisive evidence in the leadership dispute should be the certified court orders, judgments and enrolled orders issued by the FCT High Court, Federal High Court and Court of Appeal, rather than statements from either faction.
He described attempts to portray him as a self-appointed chairman as misleading, stressing that his leadership received judicial recognition at the outset of the dispute.
Imumolen also clarified that the interim order was made pending determination of the substantive dispute, noting that the existence of such an order did not extinguish the underlying controversy.
He said neither the interim order nor subsequent developments should be interpreted in isolation from the substantive proceedings before the courts.
On claims that he had been expelled from Accord, Imumolen maintained that such assertions could not, by themselves, determine who was legally entitled to occupy the party’s national chairmanship while the leadership dispute remained before competent courts.
He argued that any purported expulsion must be considered in line with the party’s constitution, applicable electoral laws and relevant judicial decisions.
Imumolen further said his leadership enjoyed substantial support among members of the National Working Committee, while acknowledging that certified judgments and enrolled court orders remained the final authority on the legal dispute.
