PDP Faction Seeks Court Order to Unseal National Secretariat Amidst Internal Strife
A faction of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), led by Kabiru Turaki (SAN), has initiated legal proceedings at the Federal High Court in Abuja, demanding the immediate unsealing and vacating of the party’s national secretariat and other offices nationwide. The action, filed through their lead counsel, Chief Chris Uche (SAN), seeks a mandatory injunction compelling the Inspector-General of Police and the Nigeria Police Force to dismantle all barricades and withdraw from the party’s headquarters.
The PDP national secretariat was sealed in November following significant clashes between two rival factions within the party. One faction is led by Turaki, while the other is aligned with the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike. The dispute escalated when both factions simultaneously planned to hold meetings at the party headquarters, leading to police intervention, the use of tear gas, and the subsequent sealing and barricading of the premises. The closure, marked by barbed-wire barricades, has critically hindered the Turaki-led National Working Committee from holding its postponed inaugural meeting.
The Convention Controversy and Legal Battles
The current leadership crisis stems from a national convention held in Ibadan, Oyo State, in November, where Kabiru Turaki emerged as the party’s national chairman. However, this convention was met with rejection by the Wike-aligned faction, who argued that it contravened existing court orders that had previously restrained the PDP from proceeding with such an exercise.
Earlier legal interventions saw Justices James Omotosho and Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja issue orders restraining the party from holding its national convention initially scheduled for November 15 and 16, 2025. In contrast, a High Court in Ibadan, Oyo State, subsequently granted an ex parte order permitting the party to proceed with the convention.
Following the Ibadan convention, the party announced the expulsion of several key figures, including Nyesom Wike, the party’s embattled national secretary Samuel Anyanwu, and the Wike-aligned factional chairman Mohammed Abdulrahman, alongside eight others. These expulsions were attributed to allegations of anti-party activities.
Legal Action to Reclaim Party Offices
The lawsuit, filed under case number FHC/ABJ/CS/252/2025, names the PDP, its newly elected national chairman Turaki, and the chairman of its Board of Trustees, Senator Adolphus Wabara, as plaintiffs. They are seeking a court order to prevent the police from any further invasion, sealing, occupation, or restriction of access to any of the party’s offices across the 36 states of the federation, including the Abuja secretariat and its annex. The Inspector-General of Police and the Nigeria Police Force are listed as defendants in this action.
The plaintiffs have specifically requested the court for “an order of mandatory injunction directing the defendants to immediately remove all barricades, unseal and vacate forthwith from the 1st plaintiff’s national secretariat at Wadata Plaza, Plot 1970 Michael Okpara Way, Wuse Zone 5, Abuja, including its annex, ‘Legacy House’, at Plot 2774 Shehu Shagari Way, Maitama, Abuja, pending the determination of this suit.”
Furthermore, they are seeking “an order restraining the defendants, whether by themselves, their officers, agents, servants or howsoever, from invading, breaking into, sealing, occupying or in any manner whatsoever restricting the plaintiffs’ access to, use or occupation of any of the 1st plaintiff’s offices in the 36 states of the federation, including its national secretariat and annex, pending the determination of this suit.”
Allegations of Unlawful Occupation and Disruption
The grounds supporting the application assert that the police, acting without lawful authority, invaded, sealed, and barricaded the party’s national secretariat and its annex with metal wires from November 18, 2025, and have maintained their presence since. The plaintiffs emphasize that Turaki and Senator Wabara are principal officers responsible for the party’s administration and management.
An affidavit filed in support of the motion, deposed by the PDP national secretary Taofik Arapaja, details the events. Arapaja stated that the elective national convention held in Ibadan on November 15 and 16, 2025, led to the election of new national officers, including Turaki as national chairman. He confirmed that the Independent National Electoral Commission was formally notified of these outcomes via a letter dated November 17, 2025.
Arapaja further alleged that the party had merely informed security agencies, including the police and the Department of State Services, about an emergency stakeholders’ meeting scheduled for November 18, 2025, and requested security coverage. However, he claims that instead of providing security, a contingent of police officers, led by the Commissioner of Police, FCT, arrived at the secretariat on the scheduled date. They allegedly fired over 200 tear gas canisters and sealed the premises, preventing access for party officials, staff, and visiting governors, including those from Bauchi and Oyo states.
The plaintiffs contend that this police action was conducted without any valid court order and constitutes an arbitrary and unlawful occupation of the party’s offices.
Impact on Party Operations and Call for Intervention
The continued sealing of the secretariat has severely disrupted the PDP’s daily operations. This includes the coordination of administrative functions, the formulation of policies, the management of membership, and crucial preparations for upcoming elections. The plaintiffs argue that the police, as a statutory body operating under the Nigeria Police Act 2020, are expected to remain impartial and should not engage in partisan activities.
The PDP faction is urging the court to intervene, asserting that the balance of convenience strongly favors granting their application. They argue that monetary damages would be insufficient compensation should their requested reliefs be denied. The plaintiffs maintain that granting their application is essential for the interest of justice and to prevent the police’s actions from being perceived as implicitly sanctioned by the court.
