Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Oba Maduabuchi, has warned that the ongoing legal disputes within the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) could stall the party’s progress unless the Supreme Court of Nigeria urgently intervenes.
Speaking in an interview, Maduabuchi said the party’s internal crisis has become deeply complicated due to conflicting leadership claims and court rulings, making it difficult for the PDP to function effectively.
He traced the crisis to the removal of former national chairman Iyorchia Ayu and the subsequent leadership of Umar Damagum, whose tenure ended in December 2025. According to him, the emergence of Mohammed Abdurahman as a new leader further complicated the situation.
Maduabuchi highlighted contradictions in court decisions, noting that while the Court of Appeal upheld the expulsion of some party members, it also appeared to recognise individuals linked to the same group in leadership positions.
He argued that such inconsistencies have created confusion over the party’s legitimate leadership structure, making it difficult to determine which faction holds authority.
The senior lawyer also questioned the legitimacy of recent conventions, citing earlier court orders that restrained the party from holding such gatherings. He maintained that proceeding with those conventions despite pending legal matters has further muddied the situation.
According to him, only a clear and expedited ruling from the Supreme Court can resolve the disputes and restore order within the party.
“Without the Supreme Court, I don’t see how PDP can progress,” he said, stressing the urgency of a definitive judgment.
He added that the uncertainty is already affecting electoral matters, with disputes arising over which faction of the PDP fielded candidates in certain elections.
Maduabuchi further emphasised the importance of a strong opposition in Nigeria, describing the PDP as a central force in the country’s democratic structure.
On the proposed Electoral Act 2026, he criticised provisions mandating direct primaries or consensus arrangements, arguing that such decisions should be left to political parties based on their constitutions.
He maintained that imposing candidate selection methods undermines internal party autonomy and runs contrary to established legal principles.
Be the first to comment