Tag: Turaki

A Federal High Court in Abuja has scheduled a hearing for January 23 on the application for stay of further proceedings filed by the Kabiru Turaki-led leadership of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) against a suit by a faction of the party loyal to Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Minister Nyesom Wike.

Justice Joyce Abdulmalik chose the date after she turned down a request by the plaintiffs’ lawyer, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), to be allowed to reply on point of law orally.

The judge said it was not her practice to take lawyers’ submissions on long hand and ordered Ikpeazu to file a formal response.

The other faction of the PDP and its acting National Chairman, Alhaji Mohammed Abdulrahman, alongside Senator Samuel Anyanwu, had filed the suit.

They are seeking, among others, an order of injunction, restraining the Turaki-led leadership (fifth to 25 defendants) from parading themselves as representatives of the PDP in any capacity whatsoever.

The plaintiffs also prayed the court to stop the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) and the Department of State Services (DSS) from allowing Turaki-led leadership access to the party’s national secretariat at Wadara Plaza in Abuja.

READ ALSO: Rage therapy

They also sought an order of injunction restraining the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from accepting any other office address or any other address from the Turaki-led leadership as PDP’s office address other than as already contained in the commission’s records, among other reliefs.

The plaintiffs seek an order declaring that INEC, the police, and the DSS are constitutionally bound to enforce and give full effect to the decisions of the Federal High Court in the earlier judgments and rulings delivered by Justice James Omotosho and Justice Peter Lifu (also of the Federal High Court, Abuja) on the last national convention of the party held in Ibadan.

At the last proceedings on December 5, Justice Abdulmalik ordered parties not to take any action pending the hearing and determination of the suit, a decision the Turaki-led PDP appealed against at the Court of Appeal.

When the case was called yesterday, Ikpeazu reminded the court that the matter was adjourned for the hearing of all pending applications.

Lawyer to the Turaki-led faction of the PDP, Chris Uche (SAN), told the court that his client had appealed the court’s decision on December 5 and that the appeal had been entered, records transmitted, and an appeal number assigned.

Uche said: “We filed an appeal against my lord’s decision, and we have a duty to report to your lordship that the appeal has now been entered in the Court of Appeal numbered: CA/ABJ/CV/1770/2025.

“We have also filed an affidavit of facts of entering the appeal to bring to your knowledge the entry of the appeal.

“Records have been fully transmitted and the plaintiffs are very much aware and have taken steps to file processes in the appeal,” he said.

Uche, who said the processes were already before the court, added that a motion for stay of further proceedings in the suit pending the appeal had also been filed.

According to him, it is trite and beyond dispute that once an appeal has been entered, the trial court is ceased to take further proceedings or further hearing in the suit.

He prayed the court to stay proceedings pending the determination of their appeal and urged the court to adjourn the matter sine die (indefinitely).

Ikpeazu argued against Uche’s request for a stay of further proceedings.

He urged the court to continue with the proceedings, having earlier made an order to take all the pending applications.

When the judge asked him if he had been served with the application for stay and whether he had filed a response, Ikpeazu said he was only served the previous day.

The lawyer chose to reply orally on the point of law, a choice the judge rejected, and ordered him to file a formal response.

Justice Abdulmalik adjourned till January 23 for the hearing of the application for stay of proceedings.

• Commission: we won’t make changes in party’s leadership now

Few days after it met with the rival factions in the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has declined a request by the Tanimu Turaki-led faction for recognition.

But the Turaki-led faction accused the electoral umpire of colluding with those bent on killing the opposition party.

INEC told the faction through a memo that it would not make any change in the leadership of the party until all cases in court challenging the national convention have been determined.

At a meeting on December 19, the commission told both factions that it would await the outcome of the cases in court before recognising any group laying claim to the leadership of the party.

The electoral body followed its stand with a December 22 memo signed by its Secretary, Dr. Rose Oriaran-Anthony.

In the memo, INEC told the Turaki-led faction it would neither recognise nor post online the list of “national officers” who emerged from the November 15-16, 2025 national convention in Ibadan.

The commission said any move to accept factional executives with the pending court cases would breach the subsisting judgments it is bound to respect, hence, the resolve to await the courts’ decisions.

READ ALSO: US: How not to engage a changing continent

In the letter addressed to Akintayo Balogun & Co, PDP’s counsel, the commission said the issue of the party’s leadership remains sub-judice and therefore cannot take any administrative action that may pre-empt the outcome of the legal processes.

The commission said it would not update its records to reflect any change in the party’s national leadership pending the outcome of ongoing court processes challenging the convention.

The memo reads: “In the light of the above pending suits, your request is prejudiced and cannot be acceded to until the determination of the pending appeals,” the letter reads.

“In the circumstances, and in obedience to the rule of law and subsisting court orders, the commission is unable to accede to the demand to recognise or update the list of the national officers said to have emerged from the PDP national convention of 15th- 16th November 2025.”

INEC bias

The Turaki-led faction swiftly reacted to the INEC position, accusing it of bias in the crisis rocking the party.

Its National Publicity Secretary Ini Ememobong accused the electoral umpire of working closely with those who wants to kill the party.

In a statement, Ememobong alleged that the commission failed to, or refused to file documents that were in their possession and within their knowledge, obviously to aid those who are bent on killing the PDP and truncating democracy.

He reminded the commission of the recent Supreme Court judgment in the case of Social Democratic Party (SDP), which provides that the commission has no business in the internal affairs of political party, including their leadership.

The statement reads: “The leadership of the PDP reiterates that in law and fact, there is no faction in the PDP. This reiteration is necessary in the light of the INEC letter explaining their inability to recognise and upload the data of our legitimately elected leadership at the convention in Ibadan due to judgments of the Federal High Court.

“The said judgments have been appealed and an application for the stay of execution filed against the judgments, and very soon the Court of Appeal will hear and give judgment in the matters.”

“While that is being awaited, it is needful to state that INEC monitored and participated in the National Executive Committee (NEC) meetings where the convention date and venue were unanimously agreed and was also in receipt of the notice of the convention- a fact the commission has unconscionably suppressed in court in several cases.

“Furthermore, the primaries in Ekiti and Osun were duly monitored by INEC, with communication emanating from the Turaki-led NWC. While we appreciate the monumental pressure that INEC has come under (after all he who pays the piper dictates the tune), we remind them that their constitutional responsibility is primarily to Nigerians and in the defence and protection of democracy.

“While INEC claims to be neutral and is awaiting the Judgement of the court on the matter, we hope that they are mindful of the judgments of the Supreme Court, especially in the SDP case, being the latest delivered last week, barring INEC from interfering in the internal leadership affairs of political parties.

“The truth remains that there is no faction in the PDP as all the legitimate organs and the administrative structure of the party are under the control of Kabiru Tanimu Turaki (SAN).

“In the past one month, the Board of Trustees, Governors Forum, State chairmen, Senate and House of Representatives Caucuses, former governors and ministers and many other notable stakeholder groups have all met with and acknowledged the leadership of the current National Working Committee, led by Turaki SAN.

“INEC must remember that democracy is hinged on majority rule, so the committee of friends of Wike and Anyanwu cannot be validly referred to as a faction of the PDP.

“Finally, having held a meeting with the commission last week, and our correspondence, thereafter, further explaining relevant issues relating to the current situation, we should ordinarily not respond to this letter, except to point out the hypocrisy and consistent bias that has completely coloured the action of the electoral umpire.

“INEC has continuously shown bias in this matter, even in the court, where they failed or refused to file documents that were in their possession and within their knowledge, obviously to aid those who are bent on killing the PDP and truncating democracy.

“If INEC, under the leadership of Prof. Joash Amupitan, SAN knew the matter was in court, what was the rationale for the contrived meeting of Friday last week? Except to paint a false perception of faction to justify their actions and inactions.

“We, therefore, urge all Nigerians, particularly our members, to remain calm, resolute and continue to support the rebirth and renaissance moves of the party, as we reposition the party for electoral success in the coming elections.”

• ‘We’re not begging any governor not to leave’

The Taminu Turaki-led Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has said it never begged any of its governors or members not to leave the party, but was reaching out with a view to rebuild the party.

The party’s National Publicity Secretary, Ini Ememobong, said this on a national television programme last night.

Ememobong said the Tanimu Turaki-led leadership of the party was reaching out to all stakeholders, including the governors.

He explained that while Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke, who dumped the party for Accord (A), was a victim of circumstance, his Rivers State counterpart was part of the problem that eventually led to his leaving the party.

He said: “In the circumstance that we are, you know that except for the legislature, where the law binds their hands, every executive has the capacity to do anything that would be legal, but immoral. So, we are not begging anybody, but we are reaching out.

“The Turaki-led administration is reaching out, the governors’ forum is reaching out. But you know there’s a thin line between what is illegal and what is immoral.”

READ ALSO; Aregbesola’s ally, Adeoti, set to join APC

Baring his mind on Governor Adeleke’s defection to Accord, Ememobong said the governor was “a victim of circumstance, which is vicarious …because every problem has a human cause and, therefore, should also have a human solution.

“At the level of the leadership, which he belonged to at the party, the party ought to have acted decisively.

“So, it’s vicarious in the sense that strong action by leadership ought to have been taken from 2023, immediately the decline started. But there were negotiations. I mean, you also cannot fully blame them because sometimes you think that with negotiations, when passions are calm, people could reconsider their position.

“But unfortunately, it didn’t until the convention took the decision it did in Ibadan. So, that’s the nature of what has happened. He’s become a victim of circumstances arising from vicarious liabilities which he cannot completely extricate himself from.”

Explaining why he was giving excuses about the Adeleke and Fubara issues, Ememobong said: “No, we’re not giving excuses. We’re saying that both are circumstantial, and even the victims of the circumstances themselves had a role to play in the conflict that eventually engulfed them. So, we’re not making excuses.

“But in the case of Fubara, you do know that Fubara voluntarily became a candidate of the party and you do know that the people who brought him have always said that there were agreements. We’re talking about agreements, and till today, he hasn’t said what the agreement was, but this political party stood by him.

“The point of our anger is really when he mentioned that he wasn’t secure in the platform. We all have great sympathies for Fubara, even as a person. Before becoming a Publicity Secretary, I had sympathies for him. He was a calm, gentle person who is pushed to the wall, who has no other direction to move than in the opposite direction.

“But to attempt to lay the blame other than where the blame ought to be… If you backtrack and look at the origin of the crisis, you know that the origin is between two people. You remember that people rose up at the beginning of this crisis and began to speak for him. After a while, he came out and said: ‘No, no, don’t worry; it’s a father-son matter.’ And after a while, a state of emergency was declared. People started advocating, and he went silent.

“I spoke to some governors, especially Governor Bala Mohammed, asking what happened. Governor Bala Mohammed said: ‘Look, we were ready and we have deployed at some points, but the governor would either remain incommunicado or will say, “Don’t worry, we would handle it.” So, volenti non fit injuria — you cannot do harm to a consenting person.

“So, while he has our sympathies, the attempt to shift blame is what we are very angry with. There’s no need shifting the blame. We know that this is a situation where Stockholm syndrome has happened, where a captive has fallen in love with the captor—we frown against that conscious amnesia where he picks and chooses where the blame should be. He knows where the origin of his problem is”.

Speaking further, the PDP Spokesman said “You do know that people do not enter a crisis until the parties themselves have declared war. So if people have agreements and the agreement is going fine and the state is not suffering, you have no business going into it because you wouldn’t even know there was an agreement.

“But it is when people begin to shout or things begin to happen to suggest that a crisis has occurred, that’s when third parties come in. In this circumstance, even when he went to the meeting with the President, did he consult the party? Did he consult the Governors’ Forum?

“Remember that even after his election as governor, it took a long while for him to even associate with the party. We quite understand that maybe his hands were tied. But immediately you feel the pinch, you begin to call for help.”