Abuja Court Issues Final Order Halting PDP’s 2025 National Convention Scheduled for Ibadan

By our Correspondent

Justice Peter Odo Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja has issued a final order stopping the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) from going ahead with its 2025 National Convention slated to hold in Ibadan, Oyo State.

The convention, scheduled for November 15 and 16 in the Oyo State capital, was intended for electing national officers of the party.

In his final judgment delivered on Friday afternoon in a suit instituted by former Jigawa State governor, Sule Lamido, Justice Lifu barred the PDP from proceeding with the convention until it adheres to its Constitution and Guidelines regarding the conduct of conventions.

The judge ordered that the Ibadan convention be suspended until Lamido is allowed to purchase the nomination form for the office of National Chairman and campaign for his aspiration.

He further restrained the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from supervising, monitoring, or in any way participating in the convention until Lamido is permitted to take part.

Justice Lifu stated that the PDP has a strict obligation to follow its own rules and ensure that eligible members are given equal opportunities to pursue their ambitions. He held that the party erred by denying Lamido the opportunity to obtain the nomination form for the national chairmanship position.

He added that the PDP’s refusal to allow some members access to nomination forms amounted to a clear breach of its Constitution and guidelines.

Concerns about the legality of the planned convention first surfaced on October 31, when Justice James Omotosho restrained INEC from recognizing any outcome of the PDP’s 2025 National Convention. The order was given while delivering judgment in another suit challenging the legality of the convention.

Justice Omotosho based his ruling on evidence showing that the PDP failed to meet the legal requirements for conducting such conventions. The court noted that congresses were not conducted in some states, contrary to electoral laws.

Additionally, the judge held that notices and correspondences signed solely by the PDP National Chairman without the National Secretary were invalid. He also pointed out that the party failed to give INEC the mandatory 21-day notice for meetings and congresses.

Justice Omotosho concluded that the PDP’s non-compliance put the planned convention at risk and advised the party to address the issues before proceeding.

The suit was filed by three aggrieved party members—Austin Nwachukwu (Imo PDP chairman), Amah Abraham Nnanna (Abia PDP chairman), and Turnah Alabh George (PDP Secretary, South-South)—through their counsel, Senior Advocate of Nigeria Joseph Daudu. It was marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2120/2025.

The PDP faced another setback on November 11 when Justice Lifu granted an interim injunction restraining the party from holding the Ibadan convention scheduled for November 15 and 16.

The court also barred INEC from supervising or recognizing any outcome of the convention where new national officers were to be elected. This decision came in response to an application filed by Sule Lamido.

Lamido, a founding member of the PDP, had filed the suit alleging he was denied the opportunity to purchase the nomination form for the chairmanship position.

Justice Lifu held that the restriction was necessary because the party failed to meet the legal requirements for conducting the convention. Evidence presented showed that the timetable for the event was not published for members as required by law.

The judge stated that the balance of convenience favored Lamido, as he would suffer more harm if excluded from the convention. Lamido also undertook to pay damages to the PDP should his suit be deemed frivolous.

Justice Lifu emphasized that constitutional and due process must be upheld by party leaders, warning that neglecting such principles threatens democracy. Citing Section 6 of the 1999 Constitution, he affirmed the duty of courts to dispense justice without fear or favour.

He concluded that anarchy prevails whenever courts abandon their constitutional responsibilities.