On Friday, the Federal High Court in Abuja rejected an application from former Jigawa State Governor Sule Lamido, which requested a court order to prevent the Peoples Democratic Party from proceeding with its planned national convention.
Lamido, through his counsel, Jeph Njikonye (SAN), had filed a motion ex parte, praying the court to issue an interim order stopping the PDP from proceeding with the convention pending the hearing and determination of a motion on notice filed alongside the suit.
However, Justice Peter Lifu, in his ruling, refused to grant the request. Instead, he ordered the PDP and the Independent National Electoral Commission, listed as the first and second defendants respectively, to appear before the court to show cause why the reliefs sought by the former governor should not be granted.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2299/2025, was filed by Lamido.
In the ex parte motion dated and filed on October 28, Lamido, through his legal team led by Njikonye, sought two orders:
“An interim order of the honourable court restraining the first defendant from conducting its national convention scheduled to hold in Ibadan, Oyo State (or any other location) on November 15 and 16,2025, or on any other date the first defendant may choose, pending the hearing and determination of the plaintiff/applicant’s motion on notice before this honourable court.
“An interim order restraining the second defendant from monitoring, supervising or recognising the first defendant’s national convention scheduled to hold in Ibadan, Oyo State (or any other location) on November15 and 16,2025, or on any other date the first defendant may choose, pending the hearing and determination of the plaintiff/applicant’s motion on notice.
Giving seven grounds in support of his application, Lamido argued that once an action is pending in court, parties are bound to maintain the status quo to prevent rendering the court’s eventual decision nugatory.
He contended that the court has inherent jurisdiction to preserve the subject matter of litigation.
Lamido maintained that if the PDP is not restrained, the party would be violating its constitution and, by implication, denying him the opportunity to contest for the position of national chairman — a position he claimed he is eminently qualified to seek.
“The plaintiff/applicant has established a prima facie legal interest in the subject matter of litigation entitling him to the grant of the interim preservative relief sought,” he stated.
He further argued that once the act sought to be restrained is completed, the equitable remedy of an interim injunction may no longer be available, hence the need for the court’s intervention at this stage.
According to him, the suit raises serious triable issues, and the balance of convenience tilts in favour of granting the interim preservative reliefs sought.
The matter, which was the only case on Friday’s cause list, was heard in the judge’s chambers after Njikonye moved the motion. Justice Lifu said it would be necessary to hear from the defendants before making any orders.
Justice Lifu gave the defendants 72 hours from the date of service to respond and adjourned the matter until November 6, for hearing.
Lamido is a founding member of the PDP and former Minister of Foreign Affairs, governed Jigawa State between 2007 and 2015. He has remained an influential figure within the party, often vocal on issues relating to internal democracy and leadership.
The PDP, Nigeria’s main opposition party, has faced a series of internal disputes in recent years, particularly following the 2023 general elections, which exposed divisions over zoning, leadership control, and the party’s electoral performance.
National conventions are critical to the party’s structure, serving as platforms to elect new national officers and review its constitution and policy direction. However, they have frequently become flashpoints for power struggles among competing factions.
The latest suit by Lamido adds to a growing list of legal challenges that have, over time, disrupted or delayed key PDP gatherings.
By ordering the PDP and INEC to show cause rather than granting an immediate injunction, the court effectively allows the party to continue preparations for its convention while ensuring that Lamido’s concerns receive judicial consideration.
The matter is expected to return to court for further hearing after the defendants respond to the order.
