The leadership crisis within the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has taken a dramatic new turn as the party, through a lawyer claiming to act on its instructions, filed a motion at the Federal High Court seeking to have its name struck out as the 8th plaintiff in a suit filed by the Adolphus Wabara-led Board of Trustees (BoT) faction asking the court to compel the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to recognise the interim National Working Committee (NWC) constituted by the BoT following the Supreme Court’s nullification of the party’s November 2025 national convention.
The development, which unfolded at the Federal High Court, Abuja, before Justice Ibrahim, exposed the depth of the factional divide within Nigeria’s main opposition party, with competing lawyers appearing in court each claiming authority to act on behalf of the PDP, while INEC declared it would not “dabble into who represents PDP in this matter.”
The suit was filed on June 4, 2026, by the Wabara-led BoT of the PDP, with the Board’s members listed as the 1st to 7th plaintiffs and the PDP itself as the 8th plaintiff. The defendant is INEC.
The plaintiffs are seeking a declaration that INEC is constitutionally bound to enforce and give full effect to the decisions of three courts: the High Court of the FCT, Abuja, in Suit No. CV/1050/2025 (Senator Samuel Anyanwu vs. Ambassador Umar Damagun and eight others, delivered January 12, 2026); the Court of Appeal in Appeal No. CA/ABJ/1613/2025 (PDP and two others vs. Hon. Austine Nwachukwu and eight others, delivered March 9, 2026); and the Supreme Court in Appeal Nos. SC/CV/164/2026 and SC/CV/166/2026 (both delivered April 30, 2026).
The plaintiffs also prayed for an order directing INEC to accept and give effect to all official correspondences, communications, notices, and engagements concerning the party from the interim NWC and to direct all correspondence emanating from the commission to the NWC as forwarded by the BoT and the National Executive Committee (NEC) through their letters dated May 4, 2026.
The affidavit in support of the originating summons, deposed to by former Niger State Governor Muazu Babangida Aliyu, set out the chain of events that led to the suit.
According to Aliyu, on November 1, 2025, key officers of the PDP, specifically Senator Samuel Anyanwu, Hon. Umar M. Bature, Adeyemi Kamaldeen Ajibade SAN, and Barr. Okechukwu Osuoha, were suspended by a resolution of the NWC for gross misconduct, anti-party activities, and insubordination. The suspension was approved at the 608th meeting of the NWC, and they were referred to the National Disciplinary Committee (NDC) for further action.
Aliyu stated that the four affected members “deliberately refused, failed and neglected to submit themselves to the party’s NDC and continued to act as officers of the party even when there was no resolution lifting their suspension.”
He disclosed that Anyanwu had earlier been recommended for expulsion by a report dated March 10, 2025, submitted by the NDC. The expulsion recommendation was upheld at the 608th NWC meeting on November 1, 2025.
Following his expulsion, Anyanwu filed suit at the FCT High Court challenging his removal. On January 12, 2026, the FCT High Court dismissed Anyanwu’s claim on the merits.
The party subsequently held its elective national convention on November 15 and 16, 2025, and elected national officers. However, the convention became the subject of multiple litigations.
The Court of Appeal, in its judgment delivered on March 9, 2026, nullified the convention. The appellate court also affirmed the suspension of the key officers referenced above. On further appeal, the Supreme Court, in its judgments delivered on April 30, 2026, affirmed the Court of Appeal’s judgment nullifying the convention and dismissed the cross-appeal challenging the suspension of the key officers.
According to Aliyu, following the vacuum created by the Supreme Court’s nullification of the convention and affirmation of the officers’ suspension, the BoT constituted an interim NWC mandated to oversee the affairs of the PDP pending the conduct of a valid national convention.
The constitution of the interim NWC was communicated to INEC by the BoT and NEC through letters dated May 4, 2026. The NWC, at its meeting on May 12, assigned portfolios to members of the interim NWC. INEC was subsequently notified of the portfolio assignments through a letter dated May 15, 2026.
However, Aliyu stated that despite receiving all three letters, INEC “failed, refused and neglected to effect the necessary corrections in its records or accord recognition to the interim National Working Committee.”
Further letters were written through the faction’s lawyer, Chief Uche, on May 8 and May 13, urging INEC to give effect to the subsisting court judgments. INEC’s refusal persisted.
Aliyu described INEC’s conduct as “a grave affront to the rule of law and the supremacy of the Constitution” and stated that the commission “has continued to retain the name of the persons who have been lawfully suspended, expelled and ceased to be members” of the PDP.
When the matter came before Justice Ibrahim, the courtroom became a theatre of competing claims to represent the PDP.
A senior lawyer, Ameh, informed the court that he had instructions to represent the PDP in the suit and had filed a notice of change of counsel for the 8th plaintiff (PDP) earlier that morning. He also filed a motion on notice seeking the striking out of the PDP’s name as the 8th plaintiff on the grounds that the party did not authorise the suit.
The motion effectively means that the PDP, through a faction opposed to the Wabara BoT, is disowning the very suit filed in its name, arguing that the BoT faction had no authority to list the party as a plaintiff.
Separately, lawyer Adedeji filed a motion on notice for parties seeking to be joined in the suit, while lawyer Ibrahim also sought joinder on behalf of other interested parties. Both Adedeji and Ibrahim argued that their applications for joinder should be heard and determined before the court proceeds with the substantive suit.
INEC’s lawyer, Adeyemi, confirmed that the commission was served with the plaintiffs’ originating summons on June 11 and had also been served with the processes filed by Ameh, Adedeji, and Ibrahim.
On the question of who legitimately represents the PDP, INEC took a neutral position. “We don’t intend to dabble into who to represent PDP in this matter, my lord,” Adeyemi stated.
He said INEC would not oppose the applications for joinder and would leave the issue of the notice of change of counsel to the court’s discretion.
Chief Uche, the lawyer who filed the original suit on behalf of the Wabara BoT faction, did not oppose the submission that the applications for joinder and Ameh’s motions be determined first. However, he informed the court that he planned to “vehemently oppose” the applications for joinder, the notice of change of counsel, and the motion to strike out the PDP’s name.
He sought a short adjournment to enable him to file counter-affidavits against all the processes.
Justice Ibrahim adjourned the matter to June 30, 2026, at noon for the hearing of all preliminary applications: the applications for joinder, the notice of change of counsel, and the motion to strike out the PDP’s name from the suit.
The judge emphasised the urgency of the matter and abridged the time for filing processes. “Because of the urgency of this matter, this court will hereby abridge the time for the expeditious hearing of the matter,” Justice Ibrahim stated.
He ordered all parties to ensure their processes and responses are filed within time before the next adjourned date and issued a stern warning: “The court will not entertain any act of delay in this suit.”
The suit comes against the backdrop of the Court of Appeal’s June 3, 2026, decision setting aside key aspects of a Federal High Court, Ibadan, judgment that had recognised a factional caretaker committee within the PDP.
The appellate court held that Justice Uche Agomoh of the Federal High Court, Ibadan, granted reliefs that were never sought by any of the parties to the suit. Justice Uchechukwu Onyemenam, delivering a unanimous judgment, faulted Justice Agomoh for going beyond the issues placed before the court in a dispute arising from the PDP leadership crisis.
Justice Agomoh had, in a judgment delivered on January 30, 2026, recognised the caretaker committee led by Abdurahman Mohammed and Samuel Anyanwu of the Nyesom Wike faction as the legitimate leadership of the party. The Court of Appeal’s nullification of that judgment effectively removed the judicial foundation upon which the Wike-aligned faction’s claim to the party’s leadership rested, at least through the Ibadan court route.
The Supreme Court’s subsequent April 30 judgments nullifying the November 2025 convention and affirming the suspension of key officers have further complicated the PDP’s leadership landscape, creating a situation where no undisputed leadership structure exists and competing factions are seeking judicial validation of their respective claims to control the party.
The suit before Justice Ibrahim goes beyond internal party politics. With the 2027 general elections approaching, the question of which faction controls the PDP has direct implications for the party’s ability to conduct primaries, submit candidates to INEC, access party funds, and engage with the electoral process as a coherent political organisation.
If the Wabara BoT faction succeeds in compelling INEC to recognise the interim NWC, it would effectively establish the BoT’s authority over the party’s affairs pending a new convention. If the PDP succeeds in having its name struck out as a plaintiff, it would undermine the BoT faction’s claim to act on behalf of the party and leave the question of INEC recognition unresolved.