The Supreme Court of Nigeria has reserved judgment in the case involving Samuel Anyanwu, the embattled National Secretary of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). Anyanwu had appealed the decision of the Court of Appeal, Enugu, which upheld a Federal High Court ruling that removed him from office.
In his appeal, Anyanwu urged the apex court to overturn the lower court’s decision, arguing that the matter concerned internal party affairs and should not have been subject to judicial intervention. His legal team, led by Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Ken Njemanze, filed a ten-ground appeal challenging the ruling.
The case, marked SC/CV/82/2025, lists Aniagu Emmanuel, the PDP, National Chairman Ambassador Iliya Damagun, and Southeast Zonal Vice Chairman High Chief Ali Odefa as respondents. The dispute stems from the Court of Appeal’s December 20, 2024, ruling, which upheld Anyanwu’s removal and recognized Sunday Udey-Okoye as his replacement.
Anyanwu’s appeal argues that the Court of Appeal erred in law by assuming jurisdiction over an issue that he believes falls outside the authority of any court. He contended that party leadership disputes should be handled internally, as outlined in the PDP constitution. He further noted that the lower court failed to determine whether the plaintiff had exhausted internal dispute resolution mechanisms before approaching the judiciary.
Another key point in Anyanwu’s argument is his claim that the court wrongly granted the plaintiff the legal standing to challenge his position. Additionally, he disputed the court’s interpretation of Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act 2022, insisting that he neither resigned nor was lawfully removed as National Secretary. He maintained that the PDP constitution clearly outlines procedures for vacating executive positions and that he had not violated those provisions.
At the Supreme Court hearing, all parties presented their arguments. However, the PDP and Damagun did not file any processes. The respondents urged the court to dismiss Anyanwu’s appeal, citing past judicial precedents on political party disputes. Senior counsel Erokoro referenced the case of Ali Modu Sheriff vs PDP and urged the Supreme Court to reconsider its position on whether party leadership disputes fall under the jurisdiction of courts.
During proceedings, Erokoro argued that Anyanwu had already resigned, stating, “The lower court says he has resigned because the constitution states that you must resign if you intend to conduct an election.” However, the Supreme Court questioned whether it had the power to determine who should hold an office within a political party.
Njemanze countered by maintaining that the lower courts had no jurisdiction over the matter. “My Lords, I have identified all the processes filed by the appellant. I adopt all these processes and, with the greatest respect, urge my Lords to allow this appeal. There are procedures for such matters. My Lords, in all your judgments in the past year, you have consistently held that issues of leadership in political parties are non-justiciable. The lower and trial courts had no jurisdiction over this issue,” he stated.
Following the submissions, a five-member panel of justices, led by Justice Uwani Musa Abba-Aji, reserved judgment. “Judgment is reserved to a date that will be communicated to the parties,” Justice Abba-Aji ruled.
Meanwhile, earlier in the hearing, the apex court struck out Anyanwu’s motion for a stay of execution. Erokoro had drawn the court’s attention to the motion, and while the court initially declined to entertain it, Erokoro insisted that it needed to be formally withdrawn. Njemanze subsequently applied to withdraw the motion, and since there was no objection from the respondents, the court struck it out.
Justice Abba-Aji ruled, “The application for a stay of execution, filed on February 5, was withdrawn without any objection from either party.”
