RismadarVoice Reporters, April 16, 2026
The National Secretary of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Samuel Anyanwu, has filed a Notice of Appeal before the Court of Appeal, challenging the judgment of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory which dismissed his suit, affirmed moves for his expulsion from the party.
The appeal, dated April 10, 2026, was lodged at the Abuja Judicial Division against the January 12, 2026 judgment delivered by Justice Yusuf Halilu in suit No. FCT/HC/CV/1050/2025.
In the appeal, Anyanwu, as appellant, is contesting the decision against nine respondents, including the PDP, its immediate past Acting National Chairman, Amb. Umar Damagum, and members of the party’s National Executive Committee.
He is urging the appellate court to set aside the entire judgment of the lower court, which declined jurisdiction on the grounds that the matter constituted an internal party dispute.
Court documents indicate that the appellant, in nine grounds of appeal, is challenging the trial court’s findings, particularly its conclusion that his failure to exhaust internal party remedies rendered the suit premature and incompetent.
Quoting the lower court, the appeal stated: “The plaintiff’s failure to exhaust the internal remedies provided by the 2nd Defendant’s Constitution renders this suit premature and incompetent, and the jurisdiction of this Court is thereby ousted.”
However, Anyanwu argued that the decision occasioned a miscarriage of justice, maintaining that his suit sought declaratory and injunctive reliefs concerning the competence of the PDP’s National Disciplinary Committee to entertain allegations against him.
He contended that the issues raised in his suit bordered on his constitutional right to fair hearing and the legality of the disciplinary process.
“The complaints of the appellant touch and concern his constitutional rights, particularly the right to fair hearing, and the violation of the Constitution of the Peoples Democratic Party,” the appeal read.
Anyanwu further argued that his case challenged the legality, constitutionality, and conduct of the disciplinary proceedings, including the findings and recommendations of the National Disciplinary Committee led by High Chief Tom Ikimi.
He maintained that his grievances transcend the internal affairs of the party and are therefore justiciable, stressing that the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria remains supreme over party rules.
“The appellant has unfettered access to the court to ventilate his grievances and seek appropriate remedy,” he stated.
The appellant also faulted the trial court’s conclusion that his claims did not fall within any recognised exception to the doctrine of non-justiciability of intra-party disputes.
According to him, the lower court erred in law when it held that his claims were non-justiciable and disclosed no reasonable cause of action against the respondents.
He insisted that his suit raised constitutional questions and alleged breaches of both the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and the PDP constitution, including claims that the disciplinary proceedings were conducted without affording him fair hearing.
As part of the reliefs sought, Anyanwu is asking the Court of Appeal to allow the appeal, set aside the decision of the lower court striking out his suit, and enter judgment in his favour.
The appeal was filed by his legal team led by K.C.O. Njemanze (SAN) and L.A. Njemanze (SAN).
The development marks another twist in the protracted crisis within the PDP, particularly in the faction aligned with the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike.
Tensions have continued to rise over the legal and political implications of Anyanwu’s status, especially following earlier decisions affirming his suspension by the party’s National Working Committee.
The dispute is also linked to controversies surrounding the party’s recent national convention and the emergence of a factional leadership.
Anyanwu had initially approached the High Court to challenge the recommendation of the PDP’s National Disciplinary Committee, which accused him of anti-party activities and recommended his expulsion.
However, the trial court dismissed the suit for lack of jurisdiction, holding that courts cannot interfere in the internal affairs of political parties where due process has been followed.
