Let me take you straight to the heart of what’s unfolding in Nigeria’s main opposition party, the PDP—and why PDP compliance has become its defining moment. The spark that ignited this crisis was when Senator Samuel Anyanwu, who had been elected National Secretary in November 2021 for a four‑year term, also ran as PDP’s governorship candidate in Imo State in 2023. That gamble triggered legal action, and lower courts declared him disqualified from his party office. Then, in a decisive reversal on March 21, 2025, the Supreme Court reinstated him, driving home that internal party processes must prevail unless laws are broken.
Two powerful figures—Nyesom Wike and Samuel Ortom—stepped into this moment. Wike, the FCT Minister and ex‑Rivers governor, and Ortom, former Benue governor, each vouched for Anyanwu and beckoned the party to adhere strictly to the court’s ruling. This isn’t traditional PDP politics; it’s a test of whether the party will submit to its constitution or succumb to factional impulses.
In this article, I’ll guide you through the full narrative: the origins, the Supreme Court’s legal reasoning, Wike and Ortom’s strategic involvement, the various reactions, the essence of genuine PDP compliance, and the implications for 2027. The information is rooted entirely in verifiable reporting.
Background of the Conflict
Genesis of the Dispute
Samuel Anyanwu began his four‑year term as PDP National Secretary in November 2021. In 2023, as he pursued the governorship of Imo State, a party member filed a case in the Enugu Federal High Court. The court ruled that Anyanwu had vacated his party office by contesting the election, and the Court of Appeal affirmed, installing Sunday Udeh‑Okoye as National Secretary. This forced PDP leadership—including governors and the Board of Trustees—to publicly recognize Okoye, signaling a dramatic reshaping of internal balance.
Legal Maneuvers and Appeals
Unwilling to relinquish his position, Anyanwu appealed to the Supreme Court and secured a stay of execution. He argued that internal leadership issues fall under the party’s jurisdiction, not the courts’. By March 2025, this matter reached the Supreme Court for conclusive resolution.
Supreme Court Verdict: Key Points
Core Legal Findings and Non‑Justiciability
On March 21, 2025, a five‑member panel of the Supreme Court, led by Justice Jamilu Tukur, unanimously ruled that both the High Court and the Court of Appeal lacked jurisdiction over internal PDP matters. The court reinforced that such issues are non‑justiciable, unless tied to criminal conduct or contractual breach. The original plaintiff was also rebuked for not demonstrating personal harm or properly including Okoye in his suit.
Reinstatement of Anyanwu
The court reinstated Anyanwu, fully recognizing his four‑year tenure. Anyanwu swiftly returned to the PDP national secretariat in Abuja, thanked Wike personally, and appealed to the party to put aside hostility and unite.
Wike & Ortom’s Role and Influence
Political Backing: Two Giants Step In
Wike, firmly in the PDP’s core circle, championed Anyanwu’s cause, framing the Supreme Court’s verdict as essential to party sovereignty. Ortom—once facing internal disciplinary threats—echoed that sentiment, reinforcing Wike’s faction and demanding clarity.
Strategic Motivations
For Wike, restoring his ally in a key party position reinforces his influence over internal governance and delegation processes leading up to 2027. For Ortom, it underscored solidarity within Wike’s bloc and his defiance of marginalizing moves he believed were unconstitutional.
Ripples within the Party
Their voices carried a strong signal: this wasn’t factional triumph, but reinforcement of PDP compliance and rule‑based order. It reminded others that internal governance—not courtrooms—dictated leadership outcomes.
Reactions Within & Outside the PDP
Party Leadership Pivot
Bayelsa PDP, aligned with Wike and Ortom, celebrated the ruling. They framed it as a moment of justice and constitutional adherence for the party, tying it to fair leadership processes.
Opposition Within the Party
The National Disciplinary Committee, intent on enforcing internal discipline, had issued summons for Anyanwu and Ortom in early 2025. Both men resisted—Anyanwu due to medical concerns, Ortom claiming lack of proper notice. The committee adjourned their cases until March 4. A later report even suggested the committee recommended Anyanwu’s expulsion over allegations of orchestrating violent disturbances at headquarters.
Public and Media Response
Most public and media attention hailed the decision as reinforcing democracy within parties. But many remain anxious: faction contests, disciplinary threats, and internal divergence show underlying instability.
PDP Compliance: What It Really Means
Internal Rulebook vs Judicial Oversight
By barring judicial intervention in non‑criminal party disputes, the Supreme Court affirmed that political parties must regulate their affairs internally without fear of external adjudication.
Governance Implications
Judicial restraint empowers internal organs—NWC, NEC, BoT—to take the lead in dispute resolution. Constitutional discipline becomes central to party unity and integrity.
Risks & Opportunities
Risks: escalating factional tension and politicized internal discipline. Opportunities: using this moment to institute proper internal dispute resolution mechanisms, reducing future legal interventions. The message is clear: external courts won’t bail out factions. Parties must act constitutionally.
Strategic Outlook for PDP
Wike‑Aligned Consolidation
Anyanwu’s reinstatement consolidates Wike’s hold on internal machinery—NEC notices, candidate identification, policy creation.
Pushback from Rival Blocs
Governor Makinde and factions aligned with Atiku have countered, voicing distrust of Wike’s expanding influence. Calls emerged for removing Wike and Ortom from internal gatherings.
Reconciliation & Continuing Rift
Efforts like the Saraki‑led reconciliation committee emerged in May, but friction continued—such as NEC notices not bearing Anyanwu’s signature, and the FCT sealing of the secretariat.
2027 Election Viability Threatened
Wike warned that unless zoning reforms and unity take hold, the PDP risks repeating its 2023 failure. Without clear internal order, campaign planning will suffer.
Potential Scenarios & Outcomes
“Wike dominance” could streamline decision‑making—but risk alienating rivals. “Factional gridlock” risks fracturing the party ahead of elections. “Defections or alliances” may marginalize the party’s core identity.
Final Thoughts
This crisis is more than political theatre—it’s a core test of PDP’s identity. The Supreme Court’s ruling on March 21, 2025, reaffirmed constitutional limits and emphasized the importance of internal resolution. Wike and Ortom’s backing of Anyanwu was more than loyalty—it was a call for PDP compliance.
Now, PDP faces a directive: ground internal power in constitutional order, not factional impulse. The immediate steps will define whether it can emerge unified and competitive for 2027—or fragment under internal strain.
The moment is decisive: will PDP align with its procedure or slide into discord? The path it chooses could define its relevance—and its future in Nigerian politics.
