Court Dismisses Pro-Wike PDP Faction’s Suit as Anyanwu Loses Fresh Legal Bid to Retain National Secretary Position
Advertisements
The Peoples Democratic Party has suffered another judicial setback in its protracted internal leadership crisis following a ruling of the Federal High Court in Abuja dismissing a suit filed by Senator Samuel Anyanwu challenging his removal as the party’s National Secretary.
The judgment, delivered by Justice M. G. Umar, struck out all the reliefs sought by the former senator, holding that the dispute fell squarely within the internal affairs of the PDP and was therefore not justiciable. The court further ruled that the suit constituted an abuse of court process and that Anyanwu’s tenure in office had already expired.
Ejes Gist News reports that the decision represents one of the clearest judicial pronouncements yet against attempts by rival factions to use the courts to resolve internal party leadership battles.
Background of the Legal Dispute
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/254/2025 – Senator Samuel Anyanwu v. Independent National Electoral Commission & Others, was instituted by Anyanwu in an effort to remain in office as National Secretary of the PDP despite internal party developments and earlier court decisions that weakened his claim.
Anyanwu, widely identified with a faction aligned to the former Rivers State governor Nyesom Wike, approached the court seeking judicial intervention to restrain the party from effecting his removal. He also asked the court to issue consequential orders binding INEC and other parties to continue recognizing him as the PDP’s National Secretary.
The case formed part of a series of litigations arising from the PDP’s post-2023 leadership struggles, which have seen competing claims to authority within the party’s National Working Committee.
Advertisements
Reliefs Sought by Senator Anyanwu
In his originating processes, Anyanwu sought several declaratory and injunctive reliefs. Chief among them was an order restraining the PDP from removing or replacing him as National Secretary pending the determination of the substantive dispute.
He also asked the court to restrain INEC from recognizing or acting on any correspondence, notices, or submissions emanating from the PDP that did not bear his signature. According to his argument, any communication to the electoral body without his endorsement was invalid and unlawful.
Anyanwu maintained that his tenure as National Secretary had not expired and asserted that he was entitled to remain in office until December 2025. He relied partly on his interpretation of an earlier Supreme Court decision, which he claimed affirmed that issues relating to his position were matters for internal party resolution rather than unilateral removal.
Argument on Tenure and Due Process
The former senator argued that his purported removal violated the PDP constitution and amounted to a denial of due process. He warned that sidelining him without exhausting internal dispute-resolution mechanisms could further destabilize the party and undermine its preparations for future elections.
According to his filings, Anyanwu insisted that his continued stay in office was necessary to preserve institutional continuity within the PDP’s national secretariat. He also contended that attempts to replace him were politically motivated and designed to marginalize certain blocs within the party.
Court’s Ruling: Lack of Jurisdiction
Justice Umar, however, rejected all the arguments advanced by the claimant. Central to the court’s decision was the long-established principle that disputes arising from the internal affairs of political parties are non-justiciable.
The judge held that matters relating to the appointment, removal, or tenure of party officers fall within the exclusive domain of political parties and are governed by their constitutions and internal regulations. Nigerian courts, he emphasized, lack jurisdiction to intervene in such disputes.
In his ruling, Justice Umar noted that the judiciary has consistently maintained this position, citing several precedents where courts declined to interfere in internal party leadership matters. He described Anyanwu’s suit as an invitation for the court to overstep its constitutional role.
Reaffirmation of Non-Justiciability Doctrine
The court stressed that political parties are voluntary associations with the autonomy to manage their internal affairs. As such, disputes over party offices must be resolved through internal mechanisms rather than through litigation.
Justice Umar ruled that Anyanwu’s claims, by their nature, sought judicial control over the PDP’s internal administration, which the court could not grant without violating settled legal principles.
“This court lacks the jurisdiction to meddle in the internal affairs of a political party,” the judge stated, adding that granting the reliefs sought would amount to an unconstitutional intrusion into party governance.
Abuse of Court Process
Beyond the issue of jurisdiction, the court also found that the suit constituted an abuse of court process. Justice Umar observed that multiple litigations involving the same subject matter and parties were already pending before various courts.
According to the court, Anyanwu and his allies had instituted similar actions in the High Courts, the Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court, all revolving around his claim to the office of National Secretary. The judge held that filing parallel suits in different courts amounted to a misuse of judicial process.
The court emphasized that such conduct undermines the integrity of the judicial system and places unnecessary strain on court resources. It warned that the judiciary would not allow litigants to engage in forum shopping or attempt to secure conflicting judgments.
Finding on Expiration of Tenure
Justice Umar further ruled that Anyanwu’s tenure as National Secretary had expired by effluxion of time. The court found that he was elected into office in 2021 and that the PDP constitution clearly stipulates the duration of tenure for national officers.
Contrary to Anyanwu’s assertion that his tenure extended to December 2025, the court held that he could not lawfully continue in office beyond the term for which he was elected. The judge noted that even if the court were inclined to consider other aspects of the case, the expiration of tenure alone was sufficient to defeat the claims.
This finding effectively dismantled the legal foundation of Anyanwu’s bid to remain in office.
Context of the PDP Leadership Crisis
The ruling is the latest development in a prolonged leadership crisis that has afflicted the PDP since its loss of power at the federal level in the 2023 general elections. The party has since been embroiled in factional disputes, internal power struggles, and extensive litigation over the control of its National Working Committee.
Several senior party figures have been locked in disagreements over the direction of the party, its internal reforms, and the composition of its leadership. These disputes have frequently spilled into the courts, creating uncertainty about the party’s official structures.
Anyanwu’s Role in the Crisis
Senator Anyanwu has remained a central figure in many of these controversies. Despite repeated legal setbacks, he had continued to assert his authority as National Secretary, often clashing with other party leaders and rival factions.
His position became increasingly tenuous following a series of court rulings and internal party decisions that questioned the legitimacy of his continued stay in office. Nevertheless, he persisted in seeking judicial backing to reinforce his claim.
Developments at the Ibadan Convention
Anyanwu’s situation deteriorated further at the PDP National Convention held in Ibadan, Oyo State, in November 2025. At the convention, delegates passed resolutions that resulted in the expulsion of several high-ranking party members, including Anyanwu.
The convention also produced a new National Working Committee, signaling a decisive shift in the party’s leadership structure. The outcome of the convention was presented by the PDP as a reset aimed at stabilizing the party and ending years of internal discord.
Emergence of New PDP Leadership
Following the Ibadan convention, the PDP now recognizes a National Working Committee led by Kabiru Tanimu Turaki. The Turaki-led NWC was elected by accredited delegates and has been presented by the party as the legitimate leadership of the opposition party.
INEC, which was joined as a defendant in Anyanwu’s suit, has continued to monitor developments within the PDP, particularly regarding compliance with electoral laws and the recognition of party officials.
The Federal High Court’s ruling is widely seen as strengthening the position of the current PDP leadership while significantly weakening Anyanwu’s legal standing.
Legal practitioners note that the judgment reinforces the judiciary’s consistent reluctance to intervene in internal party disputes. By striking out the suit on jurisdictional grounds, the court reaffirmed a principle that has shaped Nigerian political jurisprudence for decades.
The ruling also sends a signal to political actors that the courts will not be used as instruments for prolonging internal power struggles or delaying the implementation of party decisions.
For the PDP, the decision may reduce the volume of litigation that has distracted the party from organizational rebuilding and political repositioning. However, analysts caution that judicial victories alone may not resolve deep-seated factional divisions.
Silence After the Judgment
As of the time of filing this report, Senator Anyanwu had not publicly reacted to the judgment. There was also no indication that he intended to pursue further legal action in respect of the same subject matter.
What remains clear from the ruling is that the Federal High Court has firmly closed the door on Anyanwu’s latest attempt to retain the office of PDP National Secretary, leaving the resolution of the party’s leadership challenges squarely in the realm of internal political processes rather than judicial intervention.
