The leadership crisis in the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has taken a turn for the worse as 11 out of the 17 members of the National Working Committee (NWC) have disowned the Acting National Chairman, Amb. Umar Damagum and National Secretary, Sen. Samuel Anyanwu, over legal representation in a pending appeal before the Supreme Court.
Damagum had in a letter dated December 20, 2024 appointed the chambers of Dr. J Y Musa SAN and Co., a man believed to be an ally of the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, as legal representatives of the party in a Supreme Court Appeal No: CA / E/ 23/2024: Senator Samuel N. Anyanwu Vs. Aniagwu Emmanuel and 3 Ords.
The Acting National Chairman claimed in his letter that he was writing on behalf of the party’s NWC and the National Executive Committee (NEC) instructing the chambers to represent the party in the aforementioned case.
His letter read in part, “…I hereby instruct you to represent and defend us (PDP) in the appeal under reference at the Supreme Court.
“Wherefore you need further information I request that you contact me personally.”
However, members of the NWC in a letter signed by the party’s Deputy National Chairman (South) Amb. Taofeek Arapaja, National Legal Adviser, Kamaldeen Ajibade SAN, National Treasurer, Alhaji Yayari Ahmed, National Publicity Secretary, Hon. Debo Ologunagba and others, wrote a counter letter addressed to the President of the Court of Appeal which was stamped received on January 23, 2025, urged the court to disregard Damagum’s request.
Ajibade and his colleagues in the NWC countered in their petitioned titled: “Re:Letter of instruction to Represent the PDP, Umar Damagum and Others at the Supreme Court in Appeal Number CA/E/23/2024 – Sen Samuel Anyanwu VS Aniagu Emmanuel AND 3 Others.”
They declared: “Our attention has been drawn to a letter of instruction signed by the Acting National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) purportedly on behalf of the Party, the National Working Committee (NWC) and the National Executive Committee (NEC), appointing Dr. J.Y. Musa (SAN) to represent rhe Party and all others.
“We respectfully urge the Supreme Court and everyone concern(ed) to disregard the said letter.
“The National Working Committee (NWC) did not authorize the Acting National Chairman to issue the letter under reference for the Party, the National Working Committee or the National Executive Committee.
“For the avoidance of doubt, the responsibility of appointing external solicitors to handle cases on behalf of the Party is that of the National Legal Adviser pursuant to Article 42 of the Party’s Constitution and not that of any other NWC member.
“The Party had reiterated this position in a public notice issued sometime in 2022 copy of which is hereby attached.
“We therefore urge the Supreme Court to disregard the representation of Dr. J. Y. Musa or any other person appointed by the Acting National Chairman on behalf of the Party in any appeal or application emanating from the appeal under reference.”
Recall, the genesis of the case can be traced to the contention over the right occupant of the office of National Secretary.
An Appeal Court sitting in Enugu had on December 20, 2024, upheld an earlier decision of a High Court removing Senator Anyanwu as the PDP National Secretary and in his place affirmed Sunday Ude-Okoye as the right and proper person.
In response, Anyanwu filed for a Stay of Execution and Appeal, with Dr. Musa (SAN) nominated as the party’s legal counsel by Damagum his ally.
A member of the party’s NEC sympathetic to Damagum and Co who spoke on condition of anonymity argued that the Acting National Chairman acted within his powers by appointing a legal representative for the party in the case.
He based his argument on Provisions of 35 of the PDP Constitution which authorizes whoever is holding the position of National Chairman to, “provide firm and effective leadership and direct the activities of the Party” and also to “promote and defend the integrity, policies and programmes of the Party” as well as “assigning specific functions to any member or officer of the party”.
Ajibade and his NWC colleagues disagree. They argue that the PDP National Legal Adviser enjoys the exclusive constitutional right on all legal matters and that such decisions cannot be taken without his knowledge and consent.
Specifically, section 42 of the PDP Constitution states that the National Legal Adviser shall “advise the Party on all legal matters.”
Also, Provision 42 (c) and (d) states that the National Legal Adviser shall, “conduct all litigation and prosecute and defend actions on behalf of the Party, including its organs and officials in so far as the subject of the litigation affects the interest of the Party; and, (c) Interpret the laws, regulations and Constitution of the Party in the event of any ambiguities.”
The state of affairs in PDP has again called to question the feasibility of the NEC meeting scheduled to hold within the first week of February.
