The supreme court has invalidated the national convention of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) held in Ibadan, Oyo state, on November 15 and 16, 2025.
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 lacks merit.
Stephen Adah, who read the majority decision, held that the appellants violated a susbsisting order of the federal high court which restrained them from proceeding with the planned convention.
The apex court consequently dismissed both the appeal and cross-appeals and ordered parties to bear their respective costs.
The apex court further agreed with the findings of the lower courts that the PDP faction abused court processes by allegedly obtaining a counter-order from a court of coordinate jurisdiction in Ibadan after an earlier restraining order had been issued by the Federal High Court.
Justice Adah stated that the lower courts were right in relying on Sections 221, 222 and 229 of the 1999 Constitution to hold that political parties must comply strictly with constitutional provisions, electoral regulations and valid court orders in the conduct of conventions and internal party affairs.
The appeal challenged the March 9 judgment of the Court of Appeal, which upheld the earlier decision of the Federal High Court nullifying the convention and restraining the Independent National Electoral Commission from recognising its outcome.
The apex court had reserved judgment in the matter after hearing arguments on April 22.
The dispute arose from the controversial Ibadan convention organised by the Turaki-led faction of the PDP despite pending court orders and unresolved disputes over congresses conducted in several states.
Aggrieved party members had approached the Federal High Court in Abuja, arguing that the organisers failed to comply with statutory requirements under the Electoral Act and the party’s constitution before proceeding with the convention.
The trial court subsequently restrained the party from holding the convention pending compliance with its directives.
However, despite the order, the convention went ahead in Ibadan and produced a factional leadership structure, triggering fresh litigation and accusations of forum shopping within the party.
In its judgment, the Supreme Court strongly condemned what it described as a deliberate attempt by political actors to undermine judicial authority by securing conflicting orders from courts of coordinate jurisdiction.
Justice Adah said instead of obeying the order of the Federal High Court or pursuing lawful appellate remedies, the appellants allegedly approached another High Court in Ibadan to obtain orders that enabled them to proceed with the convention.
“The appellant did not go on appeal but went to another High Court where they secured orders overriding the existing order of the Federal High Court and carried on with the party convention,” the justice said.
The apex court described the conduct as “an unparalleled abuse of court process” that struck “at the very roots of the administration of justice system.”
Justice Adah warned that continued disregard for judicial orders by politicians posed grave dangers to constitutional democracy and the rule of law.
“The rule of law is not an ornamentality, revoked, destroyed or discarded in practice. It is the fundamental architecture on which the legitimacy of governance rests,” he stated.
He added that once political actors begin to treat lawful judicial processes as optional, “the very essence of constitutional democracy is imperilled.”
The court further held that political parties, though voluntary associations, derive their legal existence and authority from the Constitution and must therefore operate within constitutional and judicial limits.
Relying on Sections 221, 222 and 229 of the 1999 Constitution, the apex court held that political parties remain constitutional institutions established for the purpose of participating in governance and elections and are therefore bound by lawful court orders.
Justice Adah noted that the Federal High Court, being a superior court of record vested with judicial powers under the Constitution, could not be ignored merely because a political party considered its orders inconvenient.
The apex court also upheld the findings of the lower courts that abuse of court process had been established following the move by the PDP faction to obtain what was described as a counter-order from a court of coordinate jurisdiction in Ibadan.
The Court of Appeal had, in its March 9 judgment, affirmed the earlier decision of the Federal High Court and held that the convention was conducted in violation of subsisting judicial orders and contrary to established legal procedures.
Dissatisfied with the appellate court’s decision, the Turaki-led faction proceeded to the Supreme Court, seeking five principal reliefs and one general relief, including orders setting aside the judgments of the lower courts and validating the Ibadan convention.
However, the apex court rejected the appeal in its entirety.
