News Investigators/ The Supreme Court has voided the national convention the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) held in Ibadan, Oyo State, on Nov. 15 and Nov. 16, 2025.(
In a split decision, three out of five justices, the apex court held that the appeal filed by the Turaki-led faction of the PDP lacked merit.
Delivering the lead judgment , Justice Stephen Adah held that the appellants acted in violation of a subsisting order of the Federal High Court, which had restrained them from proceeding with the convention.
The apex court upheld earlier rulings that voided the convention, which produced the Turaki-led national executive.
Adah noted that the Ibadan convention was voided and set aside because it was conducted in flagrant disobedience to the Federal High Court judgment which put the convention on hold until some conditions are met.
He held that disobedience to lawful order of court was an unpardonable one that must not be allowed in the interest of the rule of law and democracy.
He held that going ahead with the convention despite the subsisting order against it was an affront to court authority and making mockery of majesty of the judiciary and the court.
The three majority judgment condemned the forum shopping embarked upon by the organizers of the convention by going to the High Court of Oyo state in Ibadan to secure favourable judgment.
While holding that the Federal High Court and the High Court of Oyo State are courts of coordinate jurisdiction, the Supreme Court condemned the Judge and the lawyers involved in the forum shopping adding that their action was shameful and embarrassing.
However, Justices, Haruna Tsanami and Abubakar Umar in the minority judgment held that the issue in dispute was an internal affairs of PDP that ought not to have been adjudicated upon by any law court.
The two Justices also held that a former governor of Jigawa state Sule Lamido did not explore internal conflict resolution of PDP before rushing to the Federal High Court to purse a suit on the internal affairs of his own party.
They therefore dismissed the suit on the ground that it was not justiceable.
NAN reports that in October 2025, the federal high court in Abuja stopped the PDP faction led by Seyi Makinde, governor of Oyo; and Bala Mohammed, governor of Bauchi; from going ahead with its national convention slated for November 15 and 16 in Ibadan.
Justice James Omotosho, the presiding judge, ruled that the evidence before the court showed that the party failed to hold valid state congresses before the planned convention as stipulated in the 1999 constitution and INEC guidelines, as well as its own constitution.
Both judgments by the Court of Appeal were handed down by Justices James Omotosho and Peter Lifu (both of the Federal High Court, Abuja) in two suits filed by four aggrieved members of the PDP.
The first was the judgment delivered on Oct. 31, 2025 by Justice Omotosho in a suit FHC/ABJ/CS/2120/2025 filed by three aggrieved members of the party – Austin Nwachukwu (Imo PDP Chairman), Hon Amah Abraham Nnanna (Abia PDP chairman) and Turnah Alabh George (PDP Secretary, South-South).
The second was the judgment by Justice Lifu in which the PDP was ordered not to proceed with its planned convention until it afforded a former governor of Jigawa State, Sule Lamido the opportunity to prepare and contest as a chairmanship candidate in the elective convention.
Lamido had sued over his exclusion from the national chairmanship contest, which led to Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court issuing orders halting the convention.
He argued that the party denied him the opportunity to purchase the chairmanship nomination form to enable him participate in the convention.
On Nov. 14, 2025 Lifu made a final order restraining the PDP from conducting its national convention.
He held that the evidence before the court established that Lamido was unjustly denied the opportunity to obtain a nomination form to contest the position of national chairman of the party, in violation of the PDP constitution and its internal regulations.
However, the party went ahead with the convention in defiance of the court order, insisting that the matter was an internal affair beyond judicial intervention..
NAN
