More mess for PDP as court voids planned November National Convention

BY MIKE DIKE

The Federal High Court in Abuja has halted the planned national convention of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) slated for November 15–16, 2025, in Ibadan, Oyo State, citing the party’s failure to conduct valid congresses in 14 states.

In a landmark judgment delivered on Friday, Justice James Omotosho ruled in favour of the plaintiffs — Austin Nwachukwu (Imo PDP Chairman), Amah Nnanna (Abia PDP Chairman), and Turnah George (South-South PDP Secretary) — who argued that the PDP breached its constitution and the Electoral Act by not holding mandatory ward, local government, and state congresses before announcing the convention.

Justice Omotosho held that the notice of convention issued by the party’s National Working Committee (NWC) was invalid under Article 47 of the PDP Constitution and Section 85 of the Electoral Act, both of which require properly conducted and INEC-monitored congresses as a precondition for any national convention.

“Failure to conduct valid congresses at the foundational levels renders any subsequent national exercise a nullity,” the court ruled.

The decision effectively restrains the PDP’s Acting National Chairman, Umar Damagum, and other members of the NWC from proceeding with preparations for the convention pending further notice.

In a related development, Justice Peter Lifu, presiding over another division of the Federal High Court in Abuja, directed both the PDP and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to show cause within 72 hours why the party allegedly denied former Jigawa State Governor, Sule Lamido, access to nomination forms to contest for the national chairmanship position.

The case, filed under Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/2299/2025, accuses the party leadership of deliberate exclusion and violation of internal democracy. While Justice Lifu did not issue a restraining order against the convention, his ruling leaves the door open for a possible injunction after the November 6 hearing.

The twin judgments have plunged the PDP into fresh turmoil, with rival factions exchanging blame over the party’s deepening internal crisis.

The anti-Damagum bloc, largely composed of party chairmen from the South-East and South-South zones, hailed the verdict as a “victory for internal democracy” and accused the acting chairman of running the party “in flagrant disregard of its constitution.”

Conversely, Damagum’s loyalists dismissed the ruling as a “judicial ambush,” vowing to appeal immediately.

“This is a temporary setback. We will appeal and ensure the convention holds as scheduled,” a senior NWC member said.

Political analysts warn that the judgment could further weaken the PDP ahead of the 2027 general elections, as the party continues to grapple with leadership tussles and regional power struggles.

“This ruling exposes the deep constitutional rot within the PDP and underscores its failure to reform its internal processes,” said a political analyst in Abuja. “Unless the party unites quickly, it risks entering 2027 in disarray.”

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has yet to issue an official statement on the ruling as of press time.

With multiple court orders, pending appeals, and widening factional cracks, the once-dominant opposition party now faces one of its toughest legal and political tests since returning to opposition in 2015.

In the meantime, a Federal High Court in Abuja on Friday, refused to grant an application filed by former Gov. Sule Lamido of Jigawa, seeking an order restraining the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) from proceeding with its scheduled national convention.

Lamido, in the motion ex-parte moved by his lawyer, Jeph Njikonye, SAN, had prayed the court to make the interim order, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice filed alongside.

Justice Peter Lifu, in a ruling, rather ordered the PDP and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) that are defendants in the suit to come and show cause why the ex-governor’s reliefs should not be granted.

Justice Lifu, who gave the defendants within 72 hours from the date they were served to respond, adjourned the matter until Nov. 6 for hearing.

Lamido, who is the plaintiff in the fresh suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/2299/2025, named the PDP and INEC as 1st and 2nd defendants.

In the ex-parte motion dated and filed on Oct. 28 by his team of lawyers led by Njikonye, Lamido sought two orders;

“An interim order of the honourable court restraining the 1st defendant from conducting its national convention scheduled to hold in Ibadan, Oyo State (or any other place or state) Nov. 15 and Nov. 16 or any other date(s) .

“An interim order of court restraining the 2nd defendant (INEC) from monitoring, supervising and recognising the 1st defendant’s national convention”.

Giving seven grounds why his application should be considered, Lamido averred that once an action is pending in court. parties are bound to maintain status quo to avoid subjecting the court or the plaintiff to a fait accompli.

The ex-governor said the court has an inherent jurisdiction to preserve the subject matter of litigation.

He said if the PDP is not restrained by the court, the party would be violating its constitution, and by implication denying him the opportunity to contest for the position of the national chairman of the party of which he is eminently qualified to contest.

“The plaintiff/applicant has established a prima facie legal interest in the subject matter of litigation entitling him to the grant of the interim preservative relief sought,” he said.

Lamido said where an action sought to be restrained had already been completed, the equitable remedy of interim injunction may no longer be available to him, “hence why this application is necessary at this stage.”

According to him, the plaintiff’s suit raises a serious triable issue.

He also averred that balance of convenience is in favour of the grant of the interim preservative reliefs sought.

The matter, which was the only one on Friday’s cause list, was heard in the judge’s chamber.

After Njikonye moves the motion, the judge said it would be necessary to hear from the parties.

“The court has carefully perused and painstakingly considered the motion ex-parte, the affidavits, exhibits and the written address, including the decided cases commended to the court by learned senior advocate.

“I have equally advised myself on the issues raised in the originating summons which of cause raises triable issues,” he said.

Justice Lifu said that the court was not also unmindful of the balance of convenience and the undertaking as to damages as held in the three cases cited.

“I have also averted my mind to Order 26 Rules, 8(c) of the Rules of this court and the need fo exercise my discretion judicially and judiciously.

“Consequently, considering the entire gamut of the entire suit, it is my considered view that Order 26 rule 8(c) of the 2019 Rules of this court be invoked to enable this court balance the scale and equities of the parties.

“In that wise, the respondents in this suit are herein ordered to show cause within the next 72 hours effective from the date and time of service of this order on them why the prayers of the applicant should not be so granted,” the judge ruled. He adjourned the matter until Nov. 6 for further proceedings.

In a related development, a Federal High Court in Abuja, on Friday, restrained the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from monitoring or recognising the outcome of the forthcoming Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) national convention.

Justice James Omotosho, in a judgment, held that the PDP failed to comply with relevant conditions and laws for the conduct of the convention.

The plaintiffs; Austin Nwachukwu (Imo PDP chairman), Amah Nnanna (Abia PDP chairman) and Turnah Alabh George (PDP Secretary, South-South), had filed the suit.

They had sued INEC, PDP, Samuel Anyanwu, National Secretary of the party; Umar Bature, National Organising Secretary of the party; National Working Committee (NWC) and National Executive Committee (NEC) of the party as 1st to 6th defendants.

Others joined in the suit are Umar Damagum, the PDP National Chairman; Ali Odefa and Emmanuel Ogidi as 7th, 8th and 9th defendants respectively.

The plaintiffs had instituted the suit to stop the planned Nov. 15 and Nov. 16 National Convention of PDP scheduled for Ibadan in Oyo State where its new national officers are expected to be elected.

But the PDP, in its response to the suit, urged the court to dismiss the case of the plaintiffs on the grounds of jurisdiction.

It argued that the plaintiffs lacked the legal rights to file the suit and that they did not exhaust all the internal mechanism for resolving grievances in the party.

Delivering judgment on Friday, Justice Omotosho pointed out that contrary to the submissions of the defendants, the case of the plaintiffs was beyond the purview of “internal affairs” of the party.

The judge acknowledged that internal affairs of political parties is a no-go area for the court.

He, however, observed that the plaintiffs did not contend leadership but the need for INEC to perform its statutory duty of ensuring that political parties abide by the electoral laws, guidelines and regulations on meetings, congresses, primaries and conventions.

“A suit challenging the executive decision of INEC is not an internal affairs of a political party.

“1st defendant is saddled with the responsibility of monitoring, making regulations and guidelines for the conduct of party’s primary, congresses and conventions,” he said.

The judge held that the court cannot turn its eyes away from the breach of the constitution and electoral laws in the guise of internal affairs of a political party.

According to him, doing so will be tantamount to supporting illegality.

On the issue of locus standi (legal right), the judge also disagreed that the plaintiffs lacked the necessary legal rights or failed to exhaust internal mechanism of the party because the legal action was not against the PDP but INEC.

Besides, he pointed out that the suit was a civil action aimed at sanitising the political system and ensure that parties comply with the laws and their own constitution.

The court subsequently dismissed the preliminary objection raised against the suit and went ahead to deal with the substantive case.

Justice Omotosho held that the PDP failed to comply with relevant conditions and laws for the conduct of its convention slated for Nov. 15 and Nov. 16 in Ibadan, the Oyo State capital.

He held that evidence from the electoral umpire and some of the respondents showed that congresses were not held in some states of the federation, and in breach of the law.

He held that the signing of notices and correspondence of the PDP by its national chairman without the national secretary, violated the law and consequently made such notices and correspondences a nullity.

According to Omotosho, Article 36(1)(a) and (b) of the PDP’s Constitution empowers the national secretary to conduct and handle the correspondence of the party, and also issue notice of meetings, congresses and conventions.

“The law is trite. Political parties must obey their own constitution.

“The supposed discord of the party is not the business of this court.

“We will not allow political parties to make nonsense of the law by excluding the national secretary in the conduct of its internal affairs,” he said.

The court cited Cross River and Kebbi as instances where the party’s notice of congress was signed only by the national chairman, noting that the document was dated Sept. 25.

He also held that the action of the national chairman in signing notice of congress in addition to postponement notice was invalid and as such, INEC cannot give the said congresses any recognition.

The court also invalidated the Oct. 15 National Executive meeting of the PDP because the party failed to issue notice which deprived INEC the opportunity to monitor.

Omotosho concluded that non-compliance with the laws and regulations of political parties if allowed would open the floodgates of disobedience to the Electoral Act and will be detrimental to democracy.

He said although INEC may not be able to stop political parties from conducting their meetings, congresses and conventions, the Electoral Act empowers it to “invalidate such deficient meetings, congresses and conventions”, to serve as a punitive measure to check abuses.

He said that the signing of notices by the chairman alone is an act which contravened the electoral laws as well as the party’s regulations and guidelines.

Besides, Justice Omotosho held that the PDP failed to issue the mandatory 21 days’ notice of meetings and congresses to enable INEC carry out its mandatory duty of monitoring such meetings and congresses.

He held that the failure of the PDP to comply with the law had put the planned convention in jeopardy, and subsequently advised the party to do the needful before going ahead with the election.

The court accordingly ordered INEC to refuse to recognise the outcome of the planned convention since a proper foundation had not been put in place for a valid convention.

“INEC must act to ensure strict compliance with the law,” he said.