- Court rejects Lamido’s prayer to stop PDP’s convention
A Federal High Court in Abuja, on Friday issued an order restraining the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising the outcome of the national convention planned for Ibadan, Oyo State on November 15 and 16 by the People’s Democratic Party (PDP).
Justice James Omotosho, in a judgment, held that the PDP failed to comply with relevant conditions under its constitution and laws stipulating the necessary steps to be taken before conducting such a convention.
Justice Omotosho also held that evidence supplied to the court by INEC and some of the respondents showed that congresses were not held in some states of the federation in breach of the law.
Justice Omotosho equally 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.
The judge stated 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 equally pointed out the failure of the PDP to comply with the law has put the planned convention in jeopardy, and subsequently advised the PDP to do the necessary before going ahead with the election.
The judge proceeded to restrain INEC from receiving, publishing or recognizing the outcome of the convention slated for Ibadan, until the law has been complied with.
The judgment was on a suit : FHC/ABJ/CS/2120/2025 filed by three aggrieved members of the party.
The plaintiffs – Austin Nwachukwu (Imo PDP Chairman), Hon Amah Abraham Nnanna (Abia PDP chairman) and Turnah Alabh George (PDP Secretary, South-South) – said they are unhappy with the manner the national chairman has ran the affairs of the crisis-ridden party.
Read Also: INEC to verify ADA, CDA, six others as political parties
Defendants in the suit were INEC, the PDP, its National Secretary, Samuel Anyanwu; the National Organising Secretary, Umar Bature; the NWC and the National Executive Committee (NEC).
By an order of the court, made on September 14 pursuant to applications by PDP’s National Chairman, Ambassador Umar Damagum and two other key officials – Ali Odefa and Emmanuel Ogidi – Justice Omotosho joined the three as defendants in the suit.
In the Friday judgment, Justice Omotosho noted that Article 36(1) (a) and (b) of the PDP Constitution empowers the National Secretary of the party to handle the correspondence of the party and issue notices of meetings, congresses and conventions.
The judge said it was wrong for the leadership of the PDP to exclude its National Secretary from its activities, preparatory to the convention.
Justice Omotosho referred to the cases witnessed by the PDP in Cross River and Kebbi states, where the party’s notice of congress was signed only by the National Chairman and noted that the document was dated September 25.
The judge held the action of the PDP’s National Chairman, in signing notice of congress as wells and the postponement notice, was invalid and as such INEC could not accord the congress to be conducted thereto, any recognition.
The court also invalidated the October 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 measures to check abuses.
The judge added 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.
The judge further 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 added that the failure of the PDP to comply with the law has put the planned convention in jeopardy, and subsequently advised the PDP to do the necessary before going ahead with the election.
The judge proceeded to order INEC to refuse to recognize the outcome of the planned convention since a proper foundation was not put in place for a valid convention.
He held that INEC was under the obligation to ensure strict compliance with the law.
The judge admonished the PDP to issue appropriate notices for the conduct of congresses for states and zones where congress did not hold or were postponed.
He said such notices must be signed by both the PDP’s National Chairman and National Secretary to make them valid.
Omotosho said: “INEC is not expected to give recognition to any convention not done in line with the law. INEC should not accept the results of any convention in breach of the law.”
The judge also restrained INEC from posting on its website, any action done in breach of the electoral act or any other laws.
Earlier in the judgment, Justice Omotosho struck out the submissions made by Chris Uche (SAN) and Eyitayo Jegede (SAN) on behalf of the PDP, and its organs.
The judge held that by the evidence before the court, both senior lawyers were not the proper lawyers to represent the PDP and its organs.
Justice Omotosho, in his judgment in the suit by Nwachukwu and others, noted that, as against the respondents’ contention, the case of the plaintiffs extended beyond the purview of the internal affairs of the PDP.
The judge further noted that issues relating to the internal affairs of political parties constitute “a no-go area for the court,” but observed that the plaintiffs were not contending the party’s leadership.
He said the plaintiffs, going by their filinga were concerned with 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.
The judge then, held that “a suit challenging the executive decision of INEC is not an internal affairs of a political party,” adding that the electoral body “is saddled with the responsibility of monitoring, making regulations and guidelines for the conduct of party’s primary, congresses and conventions.”
In dismissing the defendants’ notice of preliminary objection, Justice Omotosho held that his court could not turn its eyes away from the glaring breach of the Constitution and electoral laws by the PDP, which claimed that its actions were within the internal affairs of the political party.
The judge noted that his court would be supporting illegality should it close its eyes and ears to PDP’s conduct.
Justice Omotosho overruled the defendant’s challenge of the plaintiffs’ right to initiate the suit, noting that the plaintiffs’ grievance was with INEC’s conduct and not the PDP
Th judge noted that the suit was a civil case, intended to sanitise the political system and ensure that parties comply with the laws and their own constitution.
In a ruling on Friday in the suit by Lamido, Justice Peter Lifu, rejected an ex-parte motion by the ex-governor of Jigawa State to restrain the PDP from proceeding with its planned national congress.
The motion was argued by his lawyer, Jeph Njikonye (SAN).
Instead, Justice Lifu ordered the PDP and INEC, listed as defendants in the sui,t to appear before his court and show cause why the ex-governor’s prayers should not be granted.
The judge said: “I have also averted my mind to Order 26 Rules, 8(c) of the Rules of this court and the need to 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.”
Justice Lifu then adjourned further hearing till November 6.
Lamido, in a suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/2299/2025, is among others, challenging the manner the party’s leadership was proceeding with its plans to hold a national convention to elect a new crop of leaders.
