By Philomina Brando
The Supreme Court of Nigeria has invalidated the national convention of the Peoples Democratic Party held in Ibadan, Oyo State, on November 15 and 16, 2025, over violation of a subsisting court order.
In a split decision delivered on Thursday, three out of five justices of the apex court held that the appeal filed by the Tanimu Turaki-led faction of the PDP lacked merit.
Delivering the lead majority judgment, Justice Stephen Adah ruled that the appellants acted in breach of a valid order of the Federal High Court, which had restrained them from proceeding with the planned convention.
The appeal, marked SC/CV/164/2026, arose from an earlier ruling by Justice Peter Lifu of a Federal High Court in Abuja, who on November 11 issued an interim order stopping the convention pending the determination of a substantive suit filed by Sule Lamido.
On November 14, Lifu granted a final order restraining the party from conducting the convention.
In his judgment, the trial judge held that evidence before the court showed that Lamido was “unjustly denied” the opportunity to obtain a nomination form to contest for the position of national chairman of the party, contrary to the PDP constitution and its internal regulations.
The decision of the lower court was subsequently affirmed by the Court of Appeal Nigeria on March 9.
Dissatisfied, the PDP faction approached the apex court.
However, in the majority decision, Adah held that the appellants proceeded with the convention in “flagrant disregard” of a subsisting court order.
“The appellant did not go on appeal but rather went to another court of coordinate jurisdiction… Orders of courts must be obeyed and remain binding until set aside, whether regular or irregular,” the court held.
The apex court further noted that the appellants failed to challenge the findings of the appellate court, which had criticised the party for disobeying a valid court order.
Consequently, the court upheld the decision of the Court of Appeal and dismissed the appeal.
In a dissenting judgment, Justice Simon Tsammani held that the issue of disobedience to a court order was not raised by any of the parties but introduced suo motu by the court.
Tsammani also ruled that the Federal High Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain what he described as an internal party matter, and therefore upheld the appeal.
Another justice, Sadiq Umar, aligned with the dissenting opinion.