Curious Assignment of PDP Cases to Particular Judges

By ignoring the protest by the leaders of the Peoples Democratic Party and consistently assigning cases involving the party to three particular judges when there are 12 judges in the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court, the judiciary has raised allegation of complicity against itself in the crisis rocking the major opposition party, writes Wale  Igbintade 

D

espite the petition sent by the Tanimu Turaki–led Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the Chief Judge (CJ) of the Federal High Court, Justice John Tsoho, requesting that cases involving the party should not be assigned to three judges — James Omotosho, Peter Lifu and Joyce Abdulmalik — the CJ last week assigned a new case to Justice Abdulmalik.

In a letter dated November 19, 2025 and signed by the National Secretary of the faction, Taofeek Arapaja, the party described the courts of the three judges as “Courts of Particular Concern.”

While Justice Omotosho and Lifu issued judgments stopping the party from proceeding with its just concluded national convention in Ibadan, Justice Abdulmalik is currently entertaining a suit against the party and Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

Justice Omotosho had on October 31 delivered judgment in a suit filed by three aggrieved PDP members — Austin Nwachukwu (Imo State chairman), Amah Abraham Nnanna (Abia State chairman) and Turnah Alabh George (South-South secretary). In the ruling, the court halted the party’s planned national convention scheduled for November 15 and 16 in Ibadan, Oyo State.

The judge held that the PDP could not proceed with the convention until it complied with established statutory requirements under its constitution, the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the Electoral Act.

 He ruled that continuing with the convention without addressing these issues would breach internal procedures and violate the rights of members.

Similarly, on November 14, Justice Lifu directed the PDP to put the convention on hold until a former governor of Jigawa State, Sule Lamido, procured a nomination form to contest for the Office of the National Chairman of the party. He issued an order restraining INEC from supervising, monitoring or recognising any convention held by the PDP without including former Jigawa State governor as a valid contestant.

The judge held that Lamido had been denied a level playing field as he was unjustly prevented from obtaining nomination forms to contest for National Chairman, in breach of the party’s constitution and internal guidelines.

In a related judgment, Justice Abdulmalik earlier restrained the PDP from dissolving its Cross River State executive committee. The court issued the order after the PDP leadership replaced the state’s executive structure with a caretaker committee, a move the court found to be unlawful.

Despite these judicial pronouncements, the party proceeded with its national convention in Ibadan and elected Turaki as National Chairman alongside other members of a new National Working Committee (NWC), who took over from the Umar Damagum-led committee. The convention also ratified the expulsion of the three plaintiffs in the Omotosho case, alongside the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike; former Ekiti State governor, Ayodele Fayose and others.

The party explained that its decision to proceed with the convention was based on an order issued by Justice A. L. Akintola of the Oyo State High Court sitting in Ibadan, which directed it to go ahead with the national convention.

It added that it also relied on previous Supreme Court rulings, which held that issues relating to internal party affairs are largely non-justiciable, except in cases where fundamental human rights are violated.

The conflicting rulings have since led to the factionalisation of the main opposition party, as rival blocs loyal to the PDP Governors Forum and Wike, continue to lay claims to the authentic leadership of the party.

This escalated tensions between factions loyal to Turaki and Wike, culminating in a violent altercation at the PDP National Secretariat in Abuja on November 18. The incident prompted law enforcement agencies to seal off the premises, which have remained inaccessible since November 19.

Amid all these tensions, a fresh suit by the factional acting National Chairman, Mohammed Abdulrahman and factional National Secretary, Samuel Anyanwu, of the Wike-led faction was filed at the court seeking an order to invalidate the convention and reverse all decisions taken.

This prompted a petition signed by Arapaja who said he was acting under the instruction of Turaki, the NWC and the National Executive Committee (NEC) in drawing the attention of Justice Tsoho to what he described as “an emerging and troubling trend.”

According to him, “It is of great concern to our party that it would appear that all matters for the past few years filed in the Federal High Court, Abuja Judicial Division, either for or against our party, have always been assigned to the following three judges only — Hon. Justice James Omotosho, Hon. Justice Peter Lifu and Hon. Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, even though there are other judges numbering up to nine in the Abuja Division, as the division has 12 judges in total.”

Arapaja, in the petition, said public perception was increasingly casting the three courts as “courts of particular concern” in relation to matters affecting the PDP, adding that party members had bitterly complained to the newly elected leadership about the perceived pattern.

“Indeed, all these three courts are viewed by party members and indeed the public as ‘courts of particular concern’ with regard to matters pertaining to or affecting the interest of the Peoples Democratic Party,” the letter stated.

The party noted that while it holds the judiciary in high esteem, public confidence in judicial impartiality is being compromised.

“My Lord, it is trite that justice must not only be done in all cases and circumstances, with regard to matters pending and matters filed in the court of law, but justice must be seen to be done indeed by reasonable members of society, including the members of our party,” Arapaja said.

“Given the current challenges facing the party, there is a high likelihood of cases being filed for or against the party. It is in this respect that we humbly plead that matters henceforth involving our party should not be assigned to any of these three judges, since justice is rooted in trust and integrity.”

He emphasised that the party harbours no doubts about “the integrity of the judiciary, particularly the Federal High Court, Abuja Division,” but insists that perceived bias requires preemptive measures to safeguard the credibility of court processes involving the PDP.

Although the petition did not directly accuse the judges of wrongdoing or unethical conduct, some party leaders have repeatedly alleged that rulings from their courts tend to favour the faction aligned with Wike.

They cited instances where the same judges delivered many judgments to favour members of Rivers State House of Assembly loyal to Wike against Governor Siminalayi Fubara in the heat of the political crisis in the state.

Some Nigerians have also questioned some of the judgments the judges delivered, saying they were against the decisions of the Supreme Court that courts lacked the jurisdiction to entertain disputes in political parties, being an issue of internal affairs of the parties. They added that the judgments of the judges made mockery of the doctrine of stare decisis.

A PDP leader who spoke on the issue noted that while it is not the prerogative of parties to decide the judges that preside over their cases, for integrity’s sake, it is always honourable for judges to recuse themselves in such cases when they are either accused of bias or when justice is alleged to be compromised.

“Besides, the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court has 12 judges in total, and when the three judges are subtracted from the others, there are nine still left. So, why the emphasis on the three judges?” he queried.

“Before, it was Justice Okon Abang, then Inyang Ekwo. Now it is Justice Omotosho, Justice Lifu and Justice Abdulmalik,” he added.

Many leaders of the PDP feel that the judiciary is becoming complicit in the crisis rocking the party.

They always accuse judges of delivering judgments against the party in favour of the highest bidder or on the basis of influence, power or status.

At the 2025 All Nigerian Judges Conference recently, President Bola Tinubu advised judges to safeguard their integrity and that of the judiciary. He said governance loses its integrity and democracy loses its foundation when justice is compromised.

 “Let us be clear. No amount of reform can succeed if integrity is compromised. Justice must never be for sale. The bench must never be called a sanctuary for compromise,” he said.

The president stressed that public confidence in the courts depends on a fair and untainted interpretation of the Constitution. He warned that public perception of the bench should concern every judicial officer, especially at a time when the nation’s democracy depends heavily on trust in justice institutions.

The heads of the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court should refrain from any action that could cast doubt on the neutrality of the judiciary in the PDP crisis by assigning cases involving the party to judges whose neutrality is not in doubt.

Therefore, the court should heed this advice and protect its integrity, which is now standing on thin ice.