Why Turaki-led PDP Asked S’Court to Stop Wike’s Faction From Holding Planned Convention

Alex Enumah in Abuja

Reasons have emerged as to why the Kabiru Turaki-led Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) asked the Supreme Court to restrain the faction loyal to the Minister of Federal Capital Territory (FCT), from going ahead with its national convention scheduled for March 29 and 30.

According to court documents sighted by our correspondent, the main reason was to prevent a situation were the apex court’s judgment in its pending appeal would be rendered nugatory.

Recall that the Court of Appeal had in a judgment delivered on March 9, nullified last year’s national convention that produced the Turaki-led leadership of the PDP.

The three-member panel in nullifying the convention upheld the judgment of the Federal High Court, which had last year ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), not to recognize the outcome of the convention.

Dissatisfied, the appellants on March 17, filed a Notice of Appeal, seeking to set aside the judgment of the appellate court which sacked them as leaders of the PDP.

Pending the hearing and determination of the appeal marked: SC/CV/166/26, the Wike faction went ahead to fix March 29 and 30, for the election of the national executives of the PDP.

Reacting, the appellants on March 27, through their team of lawyers led by Chief Chris Uche, SAN, filed a Motion on Notice, seeking among others the stay of the execution of the appellate court judgment as well as restraining orders stopping the conduct of the convention fixed for March 29 and 30.

They predicated their demands on the grounds that the judgments of the two lower courts are all subject of appeal before the Supreme Court, and that the Record of Appeal has been transmitted and the appeal entered at the Supreme Court as SC/CV/166/2026.

While submitting that the judgments of the two lower courts were delivered without jurisdiction, the appellants claimed that, “the respondents intend, unless restrained, to give effect to the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which affirmed the judgment of the Federal High Court by organizing a fresh National convention, at Abuja on March 29 and 30, 2026, and taking further steps to present “a fiat accompli’ to the appellants and their members and officials while the merits of the appeal are yet to be decided.

“The Supreme Court’s decision, in the instant appeal, in the event that it succeeds, will be rendered nugatory unless this application is granted”.

Meanwhile, the appellants are asking the court to allow the main appeal, set aside the decision of the court of appeal which affirmed the judgment of the trial court, and also strike out the 1st to 3rd respondents from the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

According to the appellants, the lower court erred in law in assuming jurisdiction to hear a matter that is purely an internal affairs of the appellants.

Besides, the appellants submitted that the Court of Appeal perverse the course of justice when it held that the suit of the respondents disclosed a cause of action within the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court, and that the respondents possessed the necessary locus standi to bring the suit.

While the appellants are the PDP, the PDP National Working Committee (NWC), and PDP National Executive Committee (NEC), the respondents include; Austine Nwachukwu, PDP chairman, Imo state chapter, Amah Abraham Nnanna, PDP chairman, Abia state chapter; Turnah Alabh George, PDP Secretary, south-south zone; INEC; Samuel Anyanwu, PDP national secretary; Umar Bature, PDP national organising secretary; Umar Damagum, PDP national chairman; Ali Odefa; and Emmanuel Ogidi.

Recall that the Court of Appeal, Abuja, had on March 9, upheld the judgment of a Federal High Court in Abuja which had on October 31, 2025 restrained INEC from recognizing the outcome of last year’s National Convention of the PDP, that produced Tanimu Turaki as National Chairman.

A three-member panel of the appellate court had in a judgment held that it had no reason to deviate from the trial’s court decision which observed that the PDP violated its own laws in the process leading to the November 15 and 16, convention which held in Ibadan, Oyo state capital.

Recall that Justice James Omotosho of the Abuja division of the Federal High Court had restrained INEC from participating, monitoring or recognizing the outcome of the convention on the grounds that congresses were not conducted in many of the states, to warrant the conduct of the national convention.

However, the PDP went ahead to conduct the convention despite advise by Omotosho that the PDP should conduct congresses in the affected states before proceeding with the national convention.

Dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial court, the faction of the PDP, aligning with the Governor Seyi Makinde of Oyo State, approached the appellate court to nullify the verdict of Omotosho.

But in its judgment delivered by Justice Uchechukwu Onyemenam, the Court of Appeal, held that the trial judge was right to have restrained INEC from the PDP’s convention because there was evidence that the PDP meet constitutional provisions required before such convention can become valid.

Among others, Justice Onyemenam observed that there was no valid notice of the convention served on INEC as required by law, adding that there was no valid congress in more than 14 states as provided by law before the convention was put in place.

Meanwhile, the appellate court disagreed with the appellants that the case before Omotosho bordered on internal affairs of a party, which no court has jurisdiction.

The appellate court pointed out that contrary to the position of the appellants, the case of the aggrieved PDP members who instituted the case against the party was to force INEC to comply with its statutory functions in relation to party conventions.

Having failed to comply with the relevant laws, the Court of Appeal held that the Federal High Court was right in assuming jurisdiction and grant restraining order against INEC from accepting or recognising the outcome of the PDP national convention.

“Non compliance with the 1999 Constitution, Electoral Act 2022 and party Constitution and Guidelines are at the hearts of democratic governance and compliance must be strictly enforced in the interest of democracy”, the appellate court held.