Suit seeking to stop PDP November convention adjourned as two lawyers claims to represent party

Senior Advocates of Nigeria,, Chris Uche and Kaamaldeen Ajibade were on Tuesday locked in Court room claiming to represent the Peoples Democratic Party, thereby causing confusion which forced the Federal High Court in Abuja led by Justice James Omotosho to adjourn the suit seeking to stop PDP national convention in November, 2025.

The suit, marked FHC/ABJ.CS/2120/2025 was adjourned till Thursday to allow parties resolve a dispute over the party’s legal representation.

Advertisements

The plaintiffs in the case are the PDP Imo State Chairman, Austin Nwachukwu; the PDP Abia State Chairman, Amah Nnanna; and the PDP South-South Zonal Secretary, Turnah George.

Joined as defendants are the Independent National Electoral Commission, the PDP, the party’s National Secretary, Senator Samuel Anyanwu; National Organising Secretary, Umar Bature; the party’s National Working Committee, and the National Executive Committee.

Advertisements

The plaintiffs argued that PDP National convention should not be held in Ibadan, hence the defendants should be restrained from proceeding with the planned convention slated for November 15 and 16, 2025. They are also seeking an order barring the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC from monitoring the convention, pending the determination of their substantive suit.ad tragedy: Widow shares heartbreak of husband’s fatal accident | Punch

The plaintiffs who are pro-Nyesom Wike and the PDP National Secretary, Senator Samuel Anyanwu from Imo State are seeking the PDP to stop conducting or participating in any meeting, including that of the National Executive Commission, National Caucus or National Working Committee pending the determination of their substantive suit.

They urged the court to direct all parties to maintain the status quo ante bellum, by refraining from taking any steps capable of prejudicing the pending application for interlocutory injunction.

In their suit, the plaintiffs stated that they are registered members and current officeholders of the PDP, who also intend to contest positions in the forthcoming national convention but have been sidelined through what they described as “illegal and unconstitutional actions” of the defendants.

They contended that the planned convention violates the PDP Constitution, the Electoral Act 2022, and the Regulations and Guidelines for Political Parties 2022, for failing to comply with the required internal democratic procedures.

According to them, despite the pendency of their case, the defendants continued preparations for the convention, a move they said threatens their legal and political interests.

However, Tuesday’s proceedings were overshadowed by a dispute over who was authorised to represent the PDP.

Uche told the court that he was instructed by the party’s National Chairman, Umar Damagum, to appear for the PDP, citing a letter of instruction to that effect.

But Ajibade objected, insisting that as the party’s National Legal Adviser, he alone is constitutionally empowered to brief external counsel on behalf of the PDP.

He cited judicial authorities to support his position.

Faced with the standoff, Justice Omotosho directed both lawyers and their clients to step out of the courtroom for 10 minutes to seek an amicable resolution.

When proceedings resumed, Uche informed the court that the parties could not reach an agreement, adding that he was instructed directly by the National Chairman and urged the court to proceed with the hearing.

“We made deliberate efforts to resolve this minor matter,” Uche said. “My Lord, here is a letter signed by the party’s National Chairman himself. While the National Legal Adviser asked for more time, we have appealed to him to harmonise our positions so that we can move forward.”

Ajibade, however, refuted this, saying he never asked for time, and maintained that the party’s constitution clearly empowers him to brief external counsel.

He further alleged that he was threatened by some individuals during the brief recess outside the courtroom.

“What my learned friend said is not true,” Ajibade told the court. “As National Legal Adviser, I am empowered to handle the party’s legal matters. He (Uche) saw what happened outside—some people threatened to beat me up. Even an aide of a governor joined in the threats. This issue cannot be resolved here in court; it must follow the PDP Constitution.”

Uche later requested a short adjournment to allow the National Chairman, who was present in court, to reconcile with the National Legal Adviser.

He also noted that several parties had applied to be joined in the case.

The plaintiffs’ counsel, Joseph Daudu (SAN), however, urged the court to proceed with the hearing if the dispute over representation was not settled, noting that he opposed the joinder applications.

In response, Justice Omotosho said the court would give the PDP an opportunity to resolve its internal differences before proceeding, warning against further delays.

“We will give the party an opportunity to resolve its internal issues,” the judge said. “If they do not, I will not entertain any further delays. Politicians are funny; judicial processes should not be made nugatory.”

The court subsequently heard two separate motions for joinder—one filed by Paul Erokoro (SAN) on behalf of PDP National Chairman Damagum, and the other by Audu Anuga (SAN) for Chief Ali Odefa and Emmanuel Ogidi.

Erokoro argued that Damagum was a necessary party, being the chairman of the National Working Committee, National Executive Committee, and the convention committee—all central to the dispute.

Anuga also said Odefa and Ogidi were party officers whose interests would be directly affected by the outcome of the suit.

Daudu opposed both motions, arguing that the plaintiffs’ claims did not make the chairman or other officers necessary parties, and that their inclusion would amount to an abuse of court process.

“It is the plaintiffs’ claims that determine who should be joined,” Daudu submitted. “From all indications, the chairman is not a necessary party. A decision can be made without them.”

After hearing arguments, Justice Omotosho granted both applications and ordered that Damagum, Odefa, and Ogidi be joined as the 7th, 8th, and 9th defendants respectively.

He then adjourned the case to Thursday, October 16, 2025, for hearing of the substantive suit and all pending applications, directing all parties to respond to all filings within 24 hours.

The judge also noted that the court would await the resolution of the PDP’s internal dispute over legal representation.

“I have listened to the parties,” Justice Omotosho ruled. “Considering the circumstances, I hereby join Damagum, Odefa, and Ogidi as 7th, 8th, and 9th defendants respectively. This matter is adjourned to October 16 for hearing of the substantive suit and all applications.”

Advertisements