PDP factions disagree over Supreme Court judgement

The two factions of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) have continued to lay claim to the party’s leadership following the release of the Certified True Copy (CTC) of the Supreme Court judgment on Friday. The Interim National Working Committee (INWC), led by Kabiru Tanimu Turaki, welcomed the release of the CTC, saying it validated its […]

The two factions of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) have continued to lay claim to the party’s leadership following the release of the Certified True Copy (CTC) of the Supreme Court judgment on Friday.

The Interim National Working Committee (INWC), led by Kabiru Tanimu Turaki, welcomed the release of the CTC, saying it validated its claim as the authentic leadership of the party.

However, the faction backed by the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike, and led by Abdulrahman Muhammed, insisted that it remained the legally recognised leadership of the PDP.

The PDP has been embroiled in a leadership crisis since the conduct of the party’s national convention last year in Ibadan, which was championed by loyalists of Oyo State Governor Seyi Makinde.

Shortly after the convention, party members loyal to Wike rejected the outcome and announced a parallel leadership, leading to the emergence of two factions.

Following the Supreme Court judgment, the Wike-backed faction, under Abdulrahman Muhammed, declared itself the recognised leadership of the party. However, the PDP Board of Trustees (BoT), led by Senator Adolphus Wabara, countered the claim, saying it had taken over the affairs of the party.

Subsequently, a National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting appointed an Interim National Working Committee headed by Turaki.

Reacting to the release of the CTC yesterday, the National Publicity Secretary of the INWC, Ini Ememobong, told Weekend Trust that the document had vindicated the committee’s position.

He argued that the dismissal of the cross-appeal filed by Senator Samuel Anyanwu and Ajibade rendered actions taken by their faction invalid.

“If you go to the cross-appeal, you will see what the court said. We have maintained that the court dismissed the cross-appeal filed by Ajibade, Anyanwu and others. The language of the court is clear.

“Therefore, whatever actions they took during that period remain invalid. That validates the Interim National Working Committee,” he said.

Ememobong further stated that anyone who reads and properly interprets the CTC, which he described as a public document, would understand the position of the INWC.

“We said they filed a cross-appeal, while they denied doing so. The same document that suspended Ajibade also suspended Anyanwu. The effect applies to all of them,” he added.

In a swift reaction, the spokesman of the Wike-backed faction, Jungudo Haruna Mohammed, said the contents of the CTC further affirmed the leadership of Abdulrahman Muhammed and Senator Samuel Anyanwu.

In a statement, Mohammed said the document had exposed what he described as “falsehoods and deliberate misinformation” being circulated regarding the PDP leadership crisis.

“Contrary to the misleading narratives being promoted in some sections of the media and political space, the Supreme Court did not suspend Senator Samuel Anyanwu or any member of the party leadership.

“The apex court also did not direct the PDP Board of Trustees to assume control of the party, nor did it declare any vacuum within the party structure.

“The judgment was explicit, clear and unambiguous. It is therefore disappointing that despite the circulation of the CTC, some individuals have continued to deliberately distort its contents in pursuit of narrow political interests and personal relevance,” he said.

Mohammed added that those who, according to him, misinterpreted the judgment and misled the public should acknowledge that their claims were unfounded.

“What certain individuals continue to promote in the media space is merely the minority opinion contained in the judgment, which upheld the appeal. However, the majority decision of the Supreme Court remains the binding and authoritative judgment of the court.

“We further state that Senator Samuel Anyanwu, as a party to the suit, did not file any cross-appeal challenging issues relating to suspension or expulsion.

“In fact, following the dismissal of the main appeal, the Supreme Court held that there was no need to delve into the merits of the cross-appeal and accordingly dismissed it.

“It is important to clarify that the cross-appeal merely challenged the locus standi of Mr Chris Uche (SAN) to represent the party as legal counsel. The cross-appeal had absolutely nothing to do with any purported suspension or expulsion of any former national officers of the party,” he added.