Trending 
The Supreme Court has nullified the National Convention of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) held in Ibadan, Oyo State, on November 15 and 16, 2025, in a setback for a faction of the opposition party led by former Minister of Special Duties, Tanimu Turaki, SAN.
A split decision delivered on Thursday by a five-member panel of the apex court saw three justices hold that the appeal filed by the Turaki-led faction lacked merit, and they affirmed the concurrent findings of the High Court and the Court of Appeal against the conduct of the convention.
Justice Stephen Adah, who conveyed the lead judgment in appeal number SC/CV/164/2026, held that the appellants violated a subsisting order of the High Court, which limited them from proceeding with the planned convention.
The appeal originates from a decision of Peter Lifu, judge of a federal high court in Abuja, who issued a temporary order on November 11, restraining the party from proceeding with the planned convention pending the determination of a substantive suit filed by Sule Lamido, former governor of Jigawa state.
On November 14, he issued a final order prohibiting the PDP from holding its national convention. In his judgment, Lifu held that the evidence before the court established that Lamido was “unjustly denied” the opportunity to obtain a nomination form to contest the position of national chairman of the party, in violation of the PDP constitution and its internal regulations. The decision was later upheld by the Court of Appeal on March 9.
The PDP faction further appealed the appellate court’s decision. In the majority judgment, Adah held that the appellants went ahead in “flagrant disregard” of the subsisting order of the Federal High Court. The apex court held that, instead of abiding by the lower court’s order or immediately appealing it, the PDP went ahead to abuse the court process by filing a similar case before another court of coordinate jurisdiction.
“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. Even whether it is regular or irregular or even perverse…,” the court held.
Furthermore, the court also noted that the appellants in their appeal did not challenge the findings of the court of appeal that criticised the party for disobeying a subsisting court order. Adah upheld the appellate court’s verdict and dismissed the appeal.
In a dissenting judgment, Simon Tsammani, who read the lead dissenting decision, held that the issue of disobedience to the court order was not raised by any of the parties in the appeal. Rather, it was raised on the court’s observation.
Justice Tsammani also ruled that the High Court lacked jurisdiction to hear matters concerning internal party affairs and therefore allowed the appeal. Justice Sadiq Umar, another member of the Supreme Court panel, concurred with the decision.
