The Federal High Court in Abuja has adjourned until January 23, 2025, the hearing of an application for stay of further proceedings filed by the Kabiru Turaki-led faction of the Peoples Democratic Party in a case instituted by the rival group aligned with the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike.
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik fixed the new date on Wednesday to allow counsel for the plaintiffs, Onyechi Ikpeazu, sufficient time to respond to the stay application, as the intensifying legal battle over control of Nigeria’s main opposition party takes a fresh turn in the courts.
The Wike-aligned faction, represented by acting National Chairman Mohammed Abdulrahman and factional National Secretary Samuel Anyanwu, had filed the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2501/2025, seeking a series of restraining orders against the Turaki-led leadership, listed as the 5th to 25th defendants in the matter.
The plaintiffs are asking the court to bar the Turaki faction from parading themselves as legitimate representatives of the PDP and to prevent the Nigeria Police Force and the Department of State Services from granting them access to the party’s national secretariat at Wadata Plaza, Abuja. They also seek an order restraining the Independent National Electoral Commission from accepting any office address from the Turaki group other than the one already registered in the commission’s records.
Central to the plaintiffs’ case is their request for a declaration that INEC, the police, and the DSS are bound to enforce earlier judgments and rulings delivered by Justices James Omotosho and Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court, both of which had previously addressed aspects of the PDP’s ongoing leadership crisis.
Justice Abdulmalik had earlier granted an ex-parte order directing all parties not to take any steps pending the determination of the substantive suit. However, the Turaki-led faction responded by appealing the decision and filing a motion for stay of proceedings, alongside a separate motion on notice requesting that the judge recuse herself on grounds of alleged bias.
When the matter came up for hearing on Wednesday, Ikpeazu informed the court that an earlier ruling had directed that all pending applications be taken together with the substantive suit, and that the plaintiffs were prepared to proceed. However, Chief Chris Uche, counsel to the Turaki faction, notified the court that his clients had filed an appeal against the ex-parte order, which had been entered at the Court of Appeal as CA/ABJ/CV/1770/2025.
“We filed an appeal against my lord’s decision and we have a duty to report to your lordship that that appeal has now been entered in the Court of Appeal numbered: CA/ABJ/CV/1770/2025,” Uche told the court. “We have also filed an affidavit of facts of entering the appeal in order to bring to your knowledge the entry of the appeal. Records have been fully transmitted and the plaintiffs are very much aware and have taken steps to file processes in the appeal.”
Uche argued that once an appeal has been entered, the trial court should cease further proceedings, citing the case of Secondus vs. Ibaochi Alex as legal precedent. He urged Justice Abdulmalik to stay proceedings and adjourn the matter sine die—indefinitely—pending the outcome of the appeal.
Ikpeazu countered that the filing of an appeal does not automatically translate to a stay of proceedings. “By virtue of Order 4, Rules 11(2) of the Court of Appeal rules, Sub. 1 provides for a basis for the application they have just made but Sub. 2 limits the scope of the Sub. 1,” he argued, adding that the appeal was against an interlocutory decision rather than a final judgment. “The bottom line is the appeal is against the interlocutory decision of my lord.”
When Justice Abdulmalik asked whether he had been served with the stay motion, Ikpeazu replied that service had been effected “very late yesterday.” The judge then directed him to file a formal response and adjourned the case to January 23 for the hearing of the stay application.
In the recusal motion, Uche urged Justice Abdulmalik to withdraw from the case and remit the file to the Chief Judge for reassignment to another judge. He argued that the defendants had petitioned the Chief Judge against assigning PDP internal dispute cases to Justice Abdulmalik and two other judges due to perceived partisanship in handling matters related to the party’s leadership crisis.
Uche alleged that although the suit was filed on November 21, 2024, the judge made an ex-parte order on November 25 “in a format and template that was curious and in alliance with the format and template utilised by Hon. Justice Omotosho of the same court against the defendants.” He further alleged that the orders were made without real urgency and touched on the substance of the suit, suggesting a predisposition in favour of the plaintiffs.
Speaking to journalists after the hearing, the National Publicity Secretary of the PDP National Working Caretaker Committee, Jungudo Mohammed, expressed confidence that the court would grant the plaintiffs’ requests, citing two previous judgments of the Federal High Court as legal foundation for their case.
“As you are aware, previously, there were two final judgments of the federal high court stopping any planned convention in Oyo. Unfortunately, some recalcitrant members of the party went ahead and conducted that convention,” Mohammed said. “The main substantive issue here is that we are praying the court to restrict those people parading themselves as national officers of the party. And, you know, on the strength of the two earlier federal high court judgments, I actually do not want to preempt what the court will say, but your guess is as good as mine.”
The PDP leadership crisis has been deepening since late 2024, when factional divides within the party’s National Working Committee and Board of Trustees escalated into a full-blown legal and administrative battle. The party has been grappling with rival claims to leadership positions, competing conventions, and conflicting court orders, all of which have paralysed its ability to function as a unified opposition force ahead of the 2027 general elections.
The dispute between the Wike and Turaki factions reflects broader tensions within the PDP, rooted in disagreements over party structure, strategic direction, and the influence of certain political heavyweights. Wike, who served as governor of Rivers State from 2015 to 2023 and now holds a ministerial position in President Bola Tinubu’s administration, remains a powerful figure within the party despite his alignment with the ruling All Progressives Congress government. His involvement in the current leadership struggle has raised questions about internal cohesion and the future trajectory of the PDP.
The Turaki faction, led by former Minister of Special Duties and Inter-Governmental Affairs Kabiru Turaki, has contested the legitimacy of the Wike-aligned leadership, arguing that certain decisions and conventions were conducted in violation of the party’s constitution and existing court orders. Both sides have sought judicial validation of their positions, leading to a flurry of lawsuits, interlocutory applications, and appeals that have kept the PDP’s internal affairs tied up in litigation.
The legal wrangling has also drawn in key national institutions, including INEC, the police, and the DSS, all of which have been named as defendants or respondents in various suits.
