Supreme Court Nullifies Court of Appeal’s Recognition of Julius Abure as Labour Party Chairman
Apex Court Rules on Labour Party Leadership Crisis, Declares Matter an Internal Affair
In a landmark judgment delivered today, the Supreme Court of Nigeria overturned the decision of the Court of Appeal in Abuja, which had previously recognized Julius Abure as the National Chairman of the Labour Party (LP). The apex court, in a unanimous decision by a five-member panel, ruled that the Court of Appeal lacked the jurisdiction to adjudicate on the matter, emphasizing that disputes over political party leadership are internal affairs and should not be subject to judicial intervention.
The ruling has significant implications for the Labour Party, which has been embroiled in a protracted leadership crisis since the 2023 general elections. The Supreme Court’s decision effectively nullifies Abure’s claim to the chairmanship and reinforces the principle that political parties must resolve their internal disputes without court interference.
Background of the Case
The legal battle over the leadership of the Labour Party began when a faction of the party challenged Julius Abure’s legitimacy as chairman, alleging irregularities in his emergence. The dispute escalated when the Court of Appeal in Abuja ruled in favor of Abure, affirming his position as the party’s national chairman.
Dissatisfied with the appellate court’s decision, Senator Nenadi Usman and another party member filed an appeal at the Supreme Court, arguing that the Court of Appeal overstepped its bounds by delving into what should be an internal party matter.
Supreme Court’s Rationale
In its judgment, the Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeal erred in assuming jurisdiction over the case, as the crux of the dispute was purely an internal party affair. The apex court reiterated the long-standing legal principle that courts should not interfere in the internal governance of political parties unless there is a clear violation of the law or the party’s constitution.
The Supreme Court Justice who read the lead judgment, stated: “The issue of who becomes the chairman of a political party is strictly an internal affair of that party. Courts must refrain from being dragged into matters that political parties themselves should resolve. The lower court lacked the jurisdiction to have pronounced on the leadership of the Labour Party.”
The court further ruled that the appeal filed by Senator Nenadi Usman and her co-appellant was meritorious, thereby setting aside the Court of Appeal’s judgment. Additionally, the Supreme Court dismissed a cross-appeal filed by Abure’s faction, describing it as lacking merit.
Implications for the Labour Party
This ruling throws the Labour Party into further uncertainty, as it now leaves the question of leadership open for the party to resolve internally. With Abure’s recognition nullified, the party may be forced to convene a fresh congress or engage in reconciliation efforts to determine its legitimate leadership.
Political analysts suggest that the judgment could deepen divisions within the party, especially as different factions may now push for their preferred candidates to assume control. The Labour Party, which gained significant traction during the 2023 elections, risks further instability if it fails to quickly address its leadership vacuum.
Reactions from Stakeholders
Following the Supreme Court’s decision, reactions have poured in from various political stakeholders. Supporters of Senator Usman hailed the judgment as a victory for democracy and the rule of law.
“This ruling reaffirms that no individual can impose themselves on a political party through the backdoor. The Labour Party must now go back and follow due process in selecting its leaders,” said Manalo, a legal representative for the appellants.
On the other hand, Abure’s camp expressed disappointment but vowed to explore other legal and political avenues to reclaim the chairmanship. A spokesperson for the faction stated: “We respect the Supreme Court’s decision, but we believe that the party’s constitution supports Abure’s leadership. We will consult with our legal team and party members on the next steps.”
Legal Experts Weigh In
Constitutional lawyer Prof. Urji Kalu described the judgment as a reinforcement of judicial restraint in political party affairs. “The Supreme Court has consistently maintained that courts should not be used to settle political party disputes unless there is a clear breach of the law. This ruling aligns with that precedent,” he said.
Another legal analyst, Barr. James Oshima , noted that the judgment could set a precedent for similar cases in the future. “Political parties must take this as a lesson to strengthen their internal dispute resolution mechanisms. Courts will not always intervene to resolve leadership tussles.”
What Next for the Labour Party?
With the Supreme Court’s ruling, the Labour Party must now look inward to resolve its leadership crisis. Possible scenarios include:
1. Convening a National Convention – The party may be compelled to hold a fresh convention where a new chairman can be democratically elected.
2. Mediation Between Factions – Party elders and stakeholders may initiate reconciliation talks to prevent further fragmentation.
3. Legal Battles in Lower Courts – If factions remain dissatisfied, they may explore other legal options, though the Supreme Court’s position limits their chances of success.
The party’s ability to navigate this crisis will determine its stability ahead of future elections, including potential by-elections and the 2027 general elections.
Broader Implications for Nigeria’s Political Landscape
The Supreme Court’s decision extends beyond the Labour Party, serving as a warning to other political parties that courts will not always intervene in internal disputes. This could lead to more robust internal party democracy, where conflicts are resolved through constitutional means rather than litigation.
However, critics argue that the ruling may embolden powerful party executives to manipulate internal processes without fear of judicial oversight. They caution that without proper safeguards, undemocratic practices could thrive within political parties.
What you should Know
The Supreme Court’s judgment marks a critical moment in Nigeria’s political jurisprudence, reinforcing the autonomy of political parties in managing their affairs. For the Labour Party, the ruling presents both a challenge and an opportunity—to either unite under a legitimate leadership structure or risk further disintegration.
As the party regroups, political observers will be watching closely to see how it navigates this latest setback. One thing is certain: the days ahead will be decisive for the future of the Labour Party and its role in Nigeria’s evolving democracy.
More updates to follow as the story develops…
