A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has again invalidated the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) national convention held on November 15–16, 2025, ruling that it contravened both the Nigerian Constitution and subsisting court orders.
The court also directed the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) not to recognise any leadership that emerged from the disputed gathering.
In a judgment delivered by Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, the court held that all actions taken at the convention, including the election of party officials and suspension of members, are legally ineffective.
The judge emphasised that the conduct of the convention disregarded earlier court decisions, which remain binding until set aside, as reinforced by Section 287(3) of the Constitution.
The court stressed that political parties and their members are obligated to adhere strictly to their constitutions and to obey valid court rulings.
MUST READ: New PDP leaders set to emerge as Abdulrahman Caretaker Committee holds Elective Convention
It noted that despite existing judgments, some of which had been upheld on appeal, the defendants proceeded with the convention in defiance of the law.
Consequently, the court granted all reliefs sought by the plaintiffs, affirming their continued control of the party’s leadership structure, secretariat, and assets.
It further restrained INEC from recognising any officials or changes put forward by the faction linked to the convention and directed security agencies, including the police and State Security Service (SSS), to ensure the plaintiffs’ access to party facilities.
Additionally, the court barred members of the opposing faction from interfering with party properties or holding activities at the PDP national secretariat.
The suit was initiated by Mohammed Abdulrahman and Samuel Anyanwu, who challenged the legitimacy of the convention and sought to prevent the Kabiru Turaki-led group from acting on behalf of the party.
Before delivering judgment, the court dismissed an application seeking the judge’s recusal, ruling that allegations of bias must be supported by credible evidence, not speculation.
It also rejected arguments challenging the court’s jurisdiction.
The court found that the claims involved the interpretation and enforcement of constitutional and statutory provisions, as well as compliance with earlier court judgments, and are therefore within the court’s jurisdiction.
Justice Abdumalik also ruled that the plaintiffs have sufficient legal interest in the matter.
The defendants had also questioned the reason for including the SSS in the suit, but the trial judge ruled that it was necessary to join them given their role in providing security and ensuring compliance at the party’s national secretariat.
The judge concluded that the objections raised by the defendants lacked merit and dismissed the application in its entirety.
(Editor: Roluke Ogundele)
