Appeal Court throws out PDP leadership case after Supreme Court ruling

The Court of Appeal in Abuja has thrown out an appeal by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) about a leadership fight within the party.

The appeal came from a Federal High Court ruling that accepted a caretaker leadership setup as the party’s interim structure.

A three-member panel led by Judge Uchechukwu Onyemenam delivered the ruling on Wednesday. Judges Mohammed Mustapha and Okon Abang also agreed with the decision. The court shared the certified true copy of the judgement with PREMIUM TIMES on Saturday.

The court said the argument about the party’s national convention in Ibadan had become meaningless because of previous decisions from the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.

The court based its decision on earlier rulings that cancelled the PDP’s national convention held in Ibadan, Oyo State, on 15 and 16 November 2025.

"The appellant abused the process of the court to conduct the party Convention. The Party Convention conducted on 15 and 16 November 2025, is null, void and of no effect."

The defendants in this case are the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Mohammed Abdulrahman (Acting National Chairman of PDP), Senator Samuel Nnaemeka Anyanwu (National Secretary of PDP), Senator Mao Ohuabunwa (Chairman, Board of Trustees, PDP), Hon. Austine Nwachukwu (PDP Chairman, Imo State Chapter), Hon. Amah Abraham Nnanna (PDP Chairman, Abia State Chapter), and Turnah Alabh George (PDP Secretary, South-South zone).

The dispute began from the PDP national convention held in Ibadan on 15 and 16 November 2025. During this event, party leaders announced rival leadership outcomes and created different structures within the party.

This situation led to many lawsuits in different courts as competing factions questioned the legitimacy of the convention and the leadership structures that came from it.

Later, Judge Uche Agomoh of the Federal High Court, Ibadan, ruled on 30 January, accepting a caretaker committee led by Alhaji Mohammed Abdulrahman and Senator Samuel Anyanwu as the rightful leadership of the party.

Not happy with that ruling, the PDP took their case to the Court of Appeal in Appeal No. CA/IB/86/2026.

While this appeal was still pending, the Court of Appeal in Appeal No. CA/ABJ/1695/2025 cancelled the Ibadan convention.

The Supreme Court then confirmed this in Appeal No. SC/CV/164/2026. It said the convention went against a previous order from the Federal High Court made on 14 November 2025 in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/2299/2025 and had no legal effect.

After these decisions, Mr Abdulrahman and other respondents submitted a motion on 20 May asking the Court of Appeal to dismiss the PDP's appeal.

They said the Supreme Court had already decided on the legality of the Ibadan convention and that the appeal was no longer relevant.

They also claimed that continuing with the appeal would misuse the court process.

The respondents challenged the continued representation of Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Musibau Adetunbi, for the PDP, saying there was a conflict of interest.

But the PDP disagreed with this application. They said the motion was not valid because the applicants did not file a preliminary objection according to Order 10 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2021.

The PDP maintained that the appeal still had a relevant issue, especially regarding whether the Federal High Court was correct in accepting a caretaker committee as the party’s legitimate leadership.

In their argument, the PDP stated that only a client or a disciplinary body could raise conflict of interest issues, not opposing parties.

Appeal is meaningless

The Court of Appeal ruled that it would not let procedural technicalities block the main issue.

Judge Onyemenam said that even though the application was filed by motion on notice, it effectively questioned the appeal's validity and could be seen as a preliminary objection.

However, he noted that none of the parties in the lower court asked for such a declaration.

The court then assessed the application based on its merits. It found that the respondents did not have the standing to challenge the PDP’s choice of lawyer. The court explained that the appeal had become irrelevant.

It stated that both the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court had already nullified the Ibadan convention. This convention was the basis of the issue in the trial court and the current appeal.

The court said that when the foundation of a case collapses, anything built on it cannot stand in law.

It rejected the PDP’s claim that there was a separate issue about the caretaker committee, saying that matter still depended on the validity of the already cancelled convention.

The court ruled that moving forward with the appeal would not benefit anyone and would misuse the court process.

It therefore accepted the motion and dismissed the appeal.

Regarding the complaint against the lawyer, the court stated that conflict of interest claims fall under the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee, except in clear cases affecting a party’s right to speak.