The supreme court on Tuesday, April 14, fixed April 22 to hear two separate appeals filed by the Kabiru Turaki-led faction of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).
The group is seeking to overturn the court of appeal’s decision invalidating the Ibadan national convention held on November 15 to 16, 2025.
A five-member panel of the apex court, led by justice Lawal Garba, granted the Turaki group’s application for accelerated hearing and departure from the rules to abridge the time for filing briefs of argument.
In the first appeal, filed by the Turaki-led group against the PDP group loyal to the minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike, the court ordered that hearing notices be served on Mohammed Abdulrahman, the seventh respondent, who was not represented when the matter came up.
At the proceedings, counsel to the Turaki group, Chris Uche, informed the court of the pending applications, stressing the need for urgency to align with the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) timetable ahead of the 2027 general elections.
He also filed an affidavit of extreme urgency.
Counsel to Austin Nwachukwu and two others, Emmanuel Ukala (SAN), requested 15 days to file his reply, citing the need to obtain all relevant court records from the court of appeal’s decision nullifying the Ibadan Convention.
The supreme court, however, directed all nine respondents to file their replies within five days each.
In the second appeal, involving the Turaki-led group against former Jigawa state governor Sule Lamido and others, the apex court also granted accelerated hearing and abridgement of time.
Lamido had sued the group over his exclusion from the national chairmanship contest, which led to Justice Peter Lifu of the federal high court issuing orders halting the convention.
The lower courts have largely ruled against the Turaki-led executives, nullifying the Ibadan convention, barring INEC from recognising its outcomes, and restricting access to the national secretariat in some rulings.
The Turaki group has appealed to the supreme court, arguing that the matter borders on internal party affairs, which are not justiciable, and that due procedures were followed.
Comments