Supreme Court CTC Exposes Setback For Wike Camp In PDP Leadership Battle

Certified judgement copy showed Supreme Court dismissed appeals linked to rival PDP factions amid escalating leadership crisis.

A Certified True Copy (CTC) of the judgement of the apex court on the leadership tussle in the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has revealed how the faction loyal to the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike, lost out in the battle for the party’s soul.

But in a swift reaction, the Abdulrahman Mohammed leadership of the party said that the purported CTC of the recent Supreme Court judgement is not officially released. He also insisted that the Supreme Court judgement recognised him as PDP National Chairman and Senator Samuel Anyanwu as the National Secretary.

According to the CTC sighted by THISDAY yesterday, the apex court unanimously dismissed the cross appeal brought by Wike, alongside the main appeal by the Tanimu Turaki-led faction said to be loyal to the Oyo State Governor, Seyi Makinde.“The Cross-Appeal is in the circumstance of the Main Appeal, dismissed.

“Cross-Appeal Dismissed,” Justice Stephen Adah, held in the CTC, which was released to the public barely one week of the judgement.It would be recalled that the Makinde faction had emerged from the party’s convention held last November in Ibadan with Turaki as National Chairman, while the Wike faction emerged from the March convention in Abuja, with Abdulrahman Mohammed as National Chairman.

Following the March 9 judgement of the Court of Appeal which nullified the Ibadan convention, on grounds that the convention held in flagrant disobedience of the orders of the Federal High Court, Abuja, the Turaki leadership had approached the apex court to set aside the judgement of the lower court on grounds among others that the appellate court erred in law when it agreed with the Federal High Court, Abuja, that the case before it was outside the internal affairs of political parties and hence the court has jurisdiction to intervene.

But, it was not only the Turaki faction that has problem with the judgement of the appellate court, taking into cognizance the cross appeal filed by the Wike faction.

The cross appeal specifically set out to reverse the unanimous judgement of the Court of Appeal, which on March 9, affirmed the suspension of the party’s Legal Adviser, Kamaldeen Ajibade, SAN.

The Turaki faction had approached the appellate court to challenge the judgement of Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, which on October 31, 2025, restrained the PDP from proceeding with the convention slated for November 15 and 16, 2025, until it conduct proper congresses in areas congress was allegedly not held, as well as another judgement of Justice Peter Lifu, which on November 14, barred the PDP from conducting the said convention until an aspirant, the former governor of Jigawa State, Sule Lamido, was allowed to purchase nomination form and participate in the convention.

At the hearing of the appeal, Ajibade who was recognised by Justice Omotosho as the legal representative of the PDP at the trial court had objected to Chief Chris Uche, SAN representing the PDP, insisting he is the one clothed with legal authority to represent the PDP at the appeal.However, his objection was dismissed on account of his suspension from the PDP. “By leave of this Court, the appellant placed before the Court as fresh evidence the Notice evidencing the suspension of A.K. Ajibade, SAN as National Legal Adviser of the appellant on November 1, 2025. That evidence was duly admitted pursuant to the principles governing reception of fresh evidence on appeal as restated by the Supreme Court.“The legal effect of that fresh evidence is that, as at December 10, 2025 when Appeal No. CA/ABJ/1728/2025 was purportedly filed by A.K. Ajibade, SAN, he had ceased to hold the office of National Legal Adviser of the appellant. An agent whose authority has been lawfully terminated cannot bind the principal.

“Accordingly, any process filed in the name of the appellant by a person who had ceased to possess the authority to act on its behalf is incompetent,” the appellate court had held.

Wike’s faction in its bid to prevent an alleged vacuum at the expiration of the tenure of the Ambassador Iliya Damagun-led PDP had inaugurated a national caretaker committee led by Abdulrahman Mohammed as chairman and Senator Samuel Anyanwu as Secretary.

Anyanwu as scribe of the PDP played a crucial and constitutional role in the appointment of Abdulrahman Mohammed as Acting National Chairman of a faction of the PDP, and was also a member of the National Caretaker Working Committee that organised the March 28 and 29 National Convention, that produced the current national officers of PDP, said to be loyal to the FCT, Wike.

Specifically, Anyanwu had signed the letter to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) appointing Abdulrahman Mohammed as acting National Chairman on November 3, 2025, while under suspension.

Therefore, going by the appellate court’s judgement which voided all actions taken by Ajibade under suspension, it implies that the inauguration of the caretaker committee as well as March convention in Abuja which produced the Mohammed-led leadership is a nullity because Anyanwu lacked the legal authority to undertook all those actions while his suspension subsists.

Since, the apex court dismissed the appeal by the Wike faction, it simply means that the appellate court judgement affirming Ajibade’s suspension and by extension that of Anyanwu, National Organising Secretary, Bature Umar and National Auditor, Okechukwu Osuoha from the PDP subsists.

Anyanwu’s suspension and subsequent expulsion from the PDP is pending, at the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal. Anyanwu in the Notice of Appeal filed on April 10, 2026 by his lawyer, K. C. O. Njemanze, SAN, is praying the appellate court to set aside the judgement of the lower court and annul the recommended expulsion from the party.

In the nine grounds notice of appeal, Anyanwu argued that Justice Halilu erred in law when he held and declared that, “the plaintiff’s failure to exhaust the internal remedies provided by the PDP constitution rendered his suit premature and incompetent, “and the jurisdiction of this court is thereby ousted.”

In another ground, the appellant submitted that the trial court erred when it when it held that the plaintiff’s claims do not fall within any recognised exception, adding that, “claimant invites the court to determine the propriety of acts undertaken by an organ of a political party pursuant to its constitution. This court cannot do that.”

Amongst the reliefs sought include an order allowing the appeal, set aside the order of the lower court striking out plaintiff’s suit and, “to enter judgment in favour of the appellant”.