By Nchetachi Chukwuajah
The National Chairman of the Labour Party, Julius Abure, has rejected the judgment of the Federal High Court in Abuja which ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to recognise the Nenadi Usman-led caretaker committee pending the conduct of the party’s national convention.
In a statement issued in Abuja on Wednesday, January 21, by Obiora Ifoh, party’s National Publicity Secretary, Abure vowed to challenge the ruling at the Court of Appeal.
Abure, in the statement, entitled, ‘Nenadi: Labour Party to appeal judgment,’ insisted that the judgment contradicted the April 2025 verdict of the Supreme Court on the party’s leadership tussle.
Recall that Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court had on Wednesday held that Abure’s tenure as national chairman had elapsed and consequently ordered INEC to recognise the caretaker committee headed by Usman pending the conduct of the party’s national convention.
In response, the Abure-led National Working Committee (NWC) said it would immediately appeal the decision, describing it as a misinterpretation of the Supreme Court’s judgment and an intrusion into the internal affairs of the party.
The statement also alleged procedural irregularities in the handling of the case, claiming that “red flags” emerged even before judgment was delivered.
“Before today’s judgment, we have been suspecting that it may go this way because of the body language around the court. When the matter was first filed, it was assigned to Justice Omotosho, and suddenly, there was a somersault, as another matter was filed, which was an improper material, and the one sent to Omotosho was withdrawn and now sent to Justice Peter Lifu. That was a red flag for us,” the statement read.
The Abure-led camp further claimed it was denied a fair hearing, alleging that the court refused to allow it respond to issues raised in a counter-affidavit before adjourning for judgment.
The Abure faction also alleged that the outcome of the case had been preempted by its opponents.
“Secondly, the court refused us the opportunity to respond to issues raised in the counter-affidavit filed by other parties and quickly adjourned for judgment. That was the second red flag.
“Our adversaries were all over the place, jubilating weeks before, over a judgment that has not been delivered, telling everyone that they have already won. The jubilation by our adversaries was all over social media, come today, the judiciary will hand over the party to Dr Alex Otti,” the statement read.
The party leadership further questioned the substance of the ruling, and argued that the judgement contradicted established judicial precedents.
The statement maintained that the Supreme Court had clearly ruled that courts lacked the power to appoint leadership for political parties.
On the court’s conclusion that his tenure had expired, Abure’s camp insisted that no vacuum existed in the party’s leadership.
It further defended the March 2024 National Convention, maintaining that the tenure of the executive was to expire in June 2024, but the convention was held in March 2024, before the expiration of the then executive, an exercise it said created the present leadership of the party.
The party’s leadership also queried how the court arrived at its conclusion without interrogating the validity and legality of the convention.
It also urged party members to remain calm, stressing that the leadership would exhaust all legal avenues to reclaim its position.
The party’s leadership dispute followed an expanded stakeholders’ meeting of the Labour Party held in Umuahia, Abia State, where the National Executive Committee (NEC) resolved to remove Abure as national chairman.
The meeting was hosted by Governor Alex Otti and chaired by the party’s 2023 presidential candidate, Peter Obi.
Subsequently, the NEC constituted a 29-member caretaker committee, appointing Senator Nenadi Usman as chairperson.
Abure, however, approached the Federal High Court seeking validation of his continued stay in office.
In April 2025, the Supreme Court set aside an earlier Court of Appeal judgment that recognised Abure as the national chairman, holding that appellate courts lacked jurisdiction to determine the leadership of a political party.
