News
PDP Convention Halt: When Can a Court Stop Party Convention in Nigeria?
- /home/naijuinz/public_html/wp-content/plugins/mvp-social-buttons/mvp-social-buttons.php on line 27
https://naijablitznews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/PDP.jpg&description=PDP Convention Halt: When Can a Court Stop Party Convention in Nigeria?', 'pinterestShare', 'width=750,height=350'); return false;" title="Pin This Post">
- Share
- Tweet /home/naijuinz/public_html/wp-content/plugins/mvp-social-buttons/mvp-social-buttons.php on line 72
https://naijablitznews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/PDP.jpg&description=PDP Convention Halt: When Can a Court Stop Party Convention in Nigeria?', 'pinterestShare', 'width=750,height=350'); return false;" title="Pin This Post">
By Omolola Akinyemi
This article analyzes the PDP convention judgment and explains when a Nigerian court can stop a party convention, drawing from Supreme Court rulings on internal party affairs and statutory compliance.
The recent Federal High Court decision halting the Peoples Democratic Party’s (PDP) national convention has reignited debate over when a court stop party convention in Nigeria.
While the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that internal party crises are not justiciable, the Abuja court’s intervention in October 2025 shows that statutory non-compliance can open the door to judicial action.
This article examines that tension, focusing on two pivotal cases: the Supreme Court’s ruling in Samuel Anyanwu v. Aniagu Emmanuel (2025) and the High Court’s order stopping the PDP’s November 15–16, 2025, convention.
The Supreme Court’s Stand on Internal Party Affairs
In Samuel Anyanwu & Ors v. Aniagu Emmanuel & Ors (SC/CV/18/2025), delivered in March 2025, the Supreme Court of Nigeria reaffirmed a longstanding doctrine — courts have no jurisdiction over the internal leadership disputes of political parties.
Senator Anyanwu, the then National Secretary of the PDP, had been removed from his position by a faction within the party. He approached the Federal High Court, which ruled against him.
The Court of Appeal affirmed that decision. But the Supreme Court overturned both rulings, declaring the entire dispute a non-justiciable internal affair.
Justice Jamilu Tukur, delivering the lead judgment, emphasized that political parties are voluntary associations governed by their own constitutions. Courts, he said, “cannot dabble into internal matters such as leadership struggles or office appointments within political parties.”
The Court held that Anyanwu lacked locus standi because he had not demonstrated a personal legal injury. More importantly, it ruled that such disputes fall outside the jurisdiction granted to Nigerian courts by the Constitution.
This decision solidified an important principle: courts cannot stop party activities that arise purely from internal leadership quarrels or factional power struggles.
Exceptions to the Rule: When Courts May Intervene
However, the Supreme Court’s ruling did not close the door entirely. It carved out clear exceptions — circumstances where a court may legally intervene in what appears to be a party dispute. These include:
Violation of Statutory Provisions: Where a political party breaches external laws, such as the Electoral Act 2022 or INEC guidelines.
Breach of Party Constitution Affecting Rights: When a party’s actions violate its constitution in a way that infringes on a member’s right.
Fraud or Criminal Misconduct: When internal acts involve fraud, forgery, or illegal manipulation of processes.
Constitutional or Public Law Implications: When party conduct undermines broader public or constitutional obligations.
Thus, while the Supreme Court shields internal party affairs from judicial interference, it allows intervention where a party acts contrary to statutory or constitutional duties.
The PDP Convention Case: Judicial Oversight in Action
On October 31, 2025, Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, issued an order stopping the PDP’s planned national convention scheduled for November 15–16 in Ibadan.
The order followed a suit filed by PDP members who alleged that the party’s leadership violated its constitution and the Electoral Act 2022. Their key claims were:
The PDP failed to conduct valid state congresses in at least 14 states.
The party failed to issue the mandatory 21-day notice to members and to INEC before the convention.
The delegate lists were allegedly manipulated and lacked legal authenticity.
In his ruling, Justice Omotosho agreed that these alleged acts went beyond internal squabbles and entered the domain of statutory breach.
He ruled that the case “is not about the internal affairs of the PDP but about compliance with the law regulating party conventions.”
The court therefore restrained the PDP and INEC from proceeding with or recognizing the convention until full legal compliance was shown.
This landmark order demonstrates how Nigerian courts can — and sometimes must — step in when political parties ignore statutory obligations. It is not a contradiction of the Supreme Court’s doctrine but an enforcement of the exceptions it permits.
Reconciling the Two Doctrines
At first glance, the Supreme Court’s decision in Anyanwu v. Aniagu and the High Court’s order against the PDP appear to pull in opposite directions. But legally, they are complementary.
In Anyanwu, the issue was purely internal — who should occupy the position of National Secretary. The court declined jurisdiction.
In the PDP convention case, the issue was procedural illegality — failure to comply with statutory provisions of the Electoral Act and the PDP’s own constitution. The court therefore acted within its power.
The line is clear: a court cannot stop a party convention because of internal crisis, but it can stop one because of legal violations.
This balance preserves both party autonomy and the rule of law.
Implications for Political Parties
Strict Compliance Is Essential
Political parties must ensure that all congresses, conventions, and internal elections comply with their constitutions, the Electoral Act 2022, and INEC guidelines. Any procedural shortcut can render their activities void and expose them to injunctions.
Notices and Documentation Matter
Failure to issue proper notices, prepare delegate lists transparently, or conduct valid state congresses can provide legal grounds for aggrieved members to seek judicial intervention.
Internal Crisis Alone Is Not Enough
Members who seek to use the court to settle political scores without a statutory breach will fail. The judiciary is now more willing to dismiss such cases for lack of jurisdiction.
Parties Are Public Institutions
Though private in formation, political parties perform public functions in Nigeria’s democratic system. This means they cannot hide behind “internal affairs” when they break the law.
Implications for the Judiciary
The courts must continue to walk a fine line between protecting party autonomy and enforcing compliance with law. While they must avoid becoming arbiters of political infighting, they retain a constitutional duty to uphold legality and due process.
Future courts will likely apply the PDP convention judgment as a reference point, distinguishing between internal disputes (non-justiciable) and statutory breaches (justiciable).
Final thoughts
The question of whether a court stop party convention boils down to one issue: the nature of the grievance. If the dispute is a leadership or factional crisis, the courts will not intervene. But if the party violates the law — by ignoring the Electoral Act, failing to give proper notice, or breaching its constitution — a court may rightly step in and stop the convention.
The Supreme Court’s ruling in Anyanwu v. Aniagu and the Federal High Court’s 2025 judgment against the PDP represent two sides of the same legal coin: one defines the limits of judicial restraint, the other affirms the power of judicial enforcement.
For political parties, the message is simple — comply with the law, or risk judicial intervention.
References:
Samuel Anyanwu & Ors v. Aniagu Emmanuel & Ors (SC/CV/18/2025) — Supreme Court of Nigeria, March 2025.
Federal High Court (Abuja), Order Halting PDP National Convention, October 2025.
Electoral Act 2022 (Nigeria).
Onuoha v. Okafor (1983) 2 SCNLR 244; Lado v. CPC (2011) 18 NWLR (Pt. 1279) 689.
News
Why FCT can’t have state police — Senate
The Senate has explained why the Federal Capital Territory will not be included in the proposed state police structure, saying Abuja lacks the constitutional institutions required to operate one.
Chairman of the Senate Committee on Media and Publicity, Yemi Adaramodu, said the FCT has no governor or State House of Assembly and remains directly under the control of the Federal Government.
Adaramodu said the territory is administered by a minister who takes directives from the Federal Executive Council, while the National Assembly performs legislative functions for the FCT.
“I have heard many people raise a lot of questions on why the Federal Capital Territory is not among the plan for state police. The FCT issue is different. It is under the Federal Government,” he said.
He added that because Abuja does not have a governor or state legislature, it cannot operate under the same policing arrangement being proposed for the 36 states.
“The federal capital does not have an assembly. It is the National Assembly that legislates for the FCT. This is why it can’t be different from what the Federal Government does. Therefore, the federal police are in charge,” Adaramodu said.
The clarification comes as the Federal Government pushes ahead with plans for a new policing structure amid mounting calls for decentralised security across the country.
President Bola Tinubu is expected to receive the draft Executive National Policing Bill on September 3 as part of efforts to provide an operational framework for the proposed system.
Chief of Staff to the President and Chairman of the Presidential Working Group on the National Policing Bill, Femi Gbajabiamila, had also unveiled a public information portal through which Nigerians can submit memoranda and position papers on the proposal.
Under the constitutional amendments being considered, state Houses of Assembly would have powers to legislate on the establishment, administration, funding and oversight of state police.
States would bear the primary responsibility for funding their police formations, although the Federal Government could provide grants or assistance on the recommendation of the National Police Council and subject to approval by the National Assembly.
The FCT, however, would remain under the federal policing structure because of its unique constitutional status and direct administration by the Federal Government.
News
Gov Abiodun Commends Army, Police, DSS, Others for Intelligence-led Rescue of 5 Kidnapped Poly Students, 2 Others
Governor Dapo Abiodun of Ogun State has lauded the Department of State Services (DSS), the Nigerian Army, the Nigerian Police, as well as Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC), for rescuing five kidnapped students of Gateway ICT Polytechnic, Saapade, in Remo North Local Government Area of the state.
The students, who were abducted by suspected kidnappers earlier this week, were rescued in the early hours of Friday, in an intelligence-led operation around Alamala community, off Ayetoro Road Roundabout, of the state capital. Also rescued were two non-students.
The governor described the rescue as a major breakthrough in its fight against kidnapping, even as he reaffirmed his administration’s unwavering commitment to ensuring that kidnappers and other criminal elements have no hiding place in the state.
He described the operation, which included members of the State Security Network Agency (Amotekun Corps), local vigilantes and hunters, as a demonstration of the success that can be achieved when security agencies work together.
“One of the victims sustained a gunshot injury during the incident and was immediately evacuated for medical attention. The student has since been stabilised.
“This operation is still ongoing, and I wish to assure the good people of Ogun State that our security agencies remain on the trail of every individual connected with this criminal enterprise,” said the governor.
“Our resolve is very clear. Ogun State will remain hostile to criminality and safe for every law-abiding citizen, resident and investor,” the Governor declared, stressing that
According to him, recent joint security initiatives, particularly Operation Kò S’Áyé, have demonstrated the effectiveness of intelligence sharing, inter-agency collaboration and sustained operational pressure against criminal elements.
The governor also commended President Bola Ahmed Tinubu for his administration’s commitment to combating banditry, terrorism and kidnapping across the country, noting that the recent rescue of 308 abducted victims by Nigerian security forces underscores the growing effectiveness of coordinated security operations nationwide. (Reuters)
“At this juncture, I must acknowledge the purposeful leadership of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, whose administration has placed the restoration of peace and security at the centre of Nigeria’s development agenda through sustained investment in the operational capacity of the Armed Forces and other security agencies.
“The strengthening of intelligence coordination, the acquisition of modern security assets and his deliberate reforms have continued to deepen inter-agency collaboration,” he said.
The governor further noted that the Federal Government has continued to strengthen the nation’s security architecture, adding that the recent approval of a substantial salary increase for officers and men of the Armed Forces would further boost personnel welfare and morale.
“One of the kidnapped victims sustained a gunshot injuries during the operation and was immediately evacuated for medical attention and has since been stabilised.” disclosed a security source.
News
Fresh Court Document Reveals EFCC Secured Order Freezing Three Osun Govt Accounts, Not One
A fresh court document obtained has revealed that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) secured a Federal High Court order freezing not one but three bank accounts belonging to the Osun State Government over allegations of diversion of public funds and money laundering.
The newly obtained document shows that the anti-graft agency sought and obtained an ex parte order authorising the freezing of three allocation-related accounts pending the conclusion of its investigation and any subsequent prosecution.
The revelation comes amid mounting controversy over the commission’s action and a day after President Bola Tinubu directed the EFCC to immediately return to court to vacate the freezing order, describing its timing, coming days before the Osun governorship election, as “embarrassing” and capable of creating the impression of federal interference in the electoral process.
The order was granted on Tuesday, August 5, 2026, by Justice M. G. Umar of the Federal High Court, Abuja, in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1750/2026, titled In the Matter of an Application by the Executive Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission.
According to the court document obtained, the EFCC asked the court to empower its Chairman, “or any officer authorised by him,” to direct the managing directors of the affected banks to freeze accounts listed in the schedule to the application.
The commission told the court the accounts were “currently being investigated in a case of Diversion of public funds and Money Laundering pending conclusion of investigation and prosecution.”
Justice Umar granted the application after counsel to the EFCC, M. A. Babatunde, moved the motion ex parte.
The court order covers the following accounts: Osun State Government Federal Allocation Account, domiciled with First Bank Plc, Account No. 2017170947; Osun State Joint Allocation Account, domiciled with Zenith Bank Plc, Account No. 1013374191; and Osun State Joint Allocation Account, domiciled with Zenith Bank Plc, Account No. 1014374909.
The application was supported by an affidavit sworn to by EFCC investigator Ikenna Chukwueze and an exhibit marked “EFCC 1.”
Justice Umar ordered that the freezing of the accounts should remain in force pending the conclusion of investigation and prosecution.
The court record was issued under the hand of the presiding judge, with Muazu Kasimu signing as Registrar.
The newly obtained document indicates that the scope of the court order is broader than previously known.
On Thursday, it was reported that President Tinubu directed the EFCC to immediately approach the court to vacate the freezing order and discontinue all related actions after expressing concern over the timing of the move ahead of the Osun governorship election.
The President said he was “deeply embarrassed” by the timing of the action, stressing that although the commission acted pursuant to a court order and within its statutory powers, the public would inevitably attribute the development to his administration.
Before Tinubu’s intervention, the EFCC had defended its action, saying it had been investigating the Osun State Government since March 2026 over the alleged fraudulent handling of Ecology Funds, Intervention Funds and Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC) allocations amounting to about ₦11 billion.
The commission said it sought the freezing order only after allegedly discovering what it described as “precipitate and unwarranted” movement of public funds into several corporate entities beginning on August 2, insisting the action was intended to prevent the alleged looting of public funds and was not politically motivated.
SaharaReporters also reported that the Osun State Government subsequently sued the EFCC, its Executive Chairman and First Bank of Nigeria, accusing the anti-graft agency of unlawfully freezing the state’s accounts for political reasons just days before the governorship election.
Court filings seen show the state argued that the Federal Statutory Allocation Account is used to pay salaries, pensions, contractors, healthcare, education, security and other essential government obligations.
The government contended that the EFCC’s action was designed to cripple its finances at a politically sensitive period and sought, among other reliefs, an order unfreezing the accounts and ₦2 billion in damages.
-
News23 hours agoIgbale community petitions police over alleged harassment, land dispute involving Lere Oni
-
Politics19 hours agoAccord party demands removal of EFCC chairman immediately
-
News18 hours agoReps Minority Caucus Fault Tinubu Over Osun Accounts, Allege Plot to Intimidate Opposition
-
News24 hours agoYemi Amodu Accepts Role as TAMPAN National Secretary, Reaffirms Commitment to Industry Reform*
-
Crime18 hours agoSAD: Teenager kills grandparents, six others in Thailand
-
News4 hours agoFresh Court Document Reveals EFCC Secured Order Freezing Three Osun Govt Accounts, Not One
-
Economy4 hours agoEquities market records N235bn gain
-
News18 hours agoEx-VP Atiku raises alarm over strange payment into his account
