Court Fixes Jan 23 for PDP Leadership Case

• Turaki asks court to stay suit against his NWC

Chuks Okocha and Alex Enumah in Abuja

The Federal High Court in Abuja, has fixed January 23, 2026, for hearing of the application for stay of further proceedings filed by the Kabiru Turaki-led Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, against a suit instituted by a faction of the party in the camp of the Federal Capital Territory Minister, Nyesom Wike.

Justice Joyce Abdulmalik adjourned the matter to the date to allow counsel for plaintiffs, Dr Onyechi Ikpeazu, SAN, respond to the motion for stay.

The Wike-led PDP and its acting National Chairman, Alhaji Mohammed Abdulrahman, alongside Senator Samuel Anyanwu, the factional National Secretary, had filed the suit.

The plaintiffs, in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/2501/2025, had sought an order of injunction, restraining the Turaki-led leadership (5th to 25 defendants) from parading themselves as representatives of the PDP in any capacity whatsoever.

They also prayed the court to stop the police and Department of State Services, DSS, from allowing the Turaki-led leadership access to the party’s national secretariat at Wadara Plaza in Abuja.

In addition, they sought an order of injunction, restraining the the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, from accepting any other office address or any other address from the Turaki-led leadership as the PDP’s office address other than as already contained in the commission’s records, among other reliefs.

The plaintiffs prayed the court to declare that INEC, the police and the DSS were constitutionally bound to enforce and give full effect to the decisions of the Federal High Court in the judgments and rulings delivered by Justice James Omotosho and Justice Peter Lifu.

Justice Abdulmalik had earlier granted an ex-parte motion brought by the plaintiffs directing parties not to take any action pending the hearing and determination of the suit.

Following the order, the Turaki-led PDP challenged the decision at the Court of Appeal. They also filed an application for the court to stay proceedings in the suit pending the decision of the Appeal Court.

The Turaki-led leadership, through their lawyer, equally filed a motion on notice asking Justice Abdulmalik to recuse herself from the case.

They argued that there existed a reasonable and well-founded apprehension of likelihood of bias against them in the manner the suit had been handled by the judge.

Justice Abdulmalik had, on December 5, 2025, adjourned the matter to January 14 to allow parties regularise their processes and for hearing of all pending applications and the substantive suit.

At yesterday’s proceedings, lawyer to the plaintiffs, Ikpeazu, informed the court that on the last adjourned date, the court ruled that all pending applications would be taken together with the substantive case.

He said they were ready to proceed.

But Chief Chris Uche, SAN, who appeared for the Turaki-led leadership of the PDP, informed the court that on December 5 when the matter came up, they drew the attention of the judge to the motion for recusal, asking her to withdraw from the case.

The lawyer said the court then adjourned the matter for the plaintiffs to respond to their motion.

Uche said though Justice Abdulmalik made an order pending their motion for recusal, they had filed an appeal against the order.

“We filed an appeal against my lord’s decision and we have a duty to report to your lordship that, that appeal has now been entered in Court of Appeal numbered: CA/ABJ/CV/1770/2025.

“We have also filed an affidavit of facts of entering of the appeal in order to bring to your knowledge the entry of the appeal.

“Records have been fully transmitted and the plaintiffs are very much aware and have taken steps to filed processes in the appeal,” he said.

He, therefore, prayed the court to stay proceedings pending the determination of their appeal and urged the court to adjourn the matter sine die (indefinitely).

Responding, Ikpeazu admitted that though an appeal had been filed, an appeal in a matter did not automatically translate into a stay of execution or proceedings.

He argued that in determining whether or not to proceed, the nature of the appeal is utmost relevant.

“By virtue of Order 4, Rules 11(2) of the Court of Appeal rules, Sub. 1 provides for a basis for the application they have just made but Sub. 2 limits the scope of the Sub. 1.

“The bottom line is the appeal is against the interlocutory decision of my lord,” he said, arguing that the court has the inherent power to made an order for parties to stay action while the subject matter is determined.

Turaki Faction Asks Court to Stay Suit

Meanwhile, the Kabiru Turaki-led PDP has asked Justice Abdulmalik of a Federal High Court in Abuja, to stay further proceedings in the suit by a faction of the party in the camp of Wike.

When the case was called yesterday, lawyer to the plaintiffs, informed the court that on the last adjourned date, the court ruled that all pending applications would be taken together with the substantive case.

Uche, who appeared for the Turaki faction, informed the court that on December 5, when the matter came up, they drew the attention of the judge to the motion for recusal, asking her to withdraw from the case.

The lawyer said the court then adjourned the matter for the plaintiffs to respond to their motion.

Uche said though Justice Abdulmalik made an order pending their motion for recusal, they had filed an appeal against the order.

“We filed an appeal against my lord’s decision and we have a duty to report to your lordship that, that appeal has now been entered in Court of Appeal numbered: CA/ABJ/CV/1770/2025.

“We have also filed an affidavit of facts of entering of the appeal in order to bring to your knowledge the entry of the appeal.

“Records have been fully transmitted and the plaintiffs are very much aware and have taken steps to filed processes in the appeal,” he said.

He, therefore, prayed the court to stay proceedings pending the determination of their appeal and urged the court to adjourn the matter sine die (indefinitely).

Responding, Ikpeazu admitted that though an appeal had been filed, it did not automatically translate into a stay of execution or proceedings.

He accordingly urged the court to proceed with the proceedings, having earlier made order to take all the pending applications.

Responding, Justice Abdulmalik directed Ikpeazu to filed a formal application in response to the motion for stay.

Justice Abdulmalik consequently adjourned the matter until January 23 for hearing of the application for an order staying further proceedings in the suit.