You’ve likely seen headlines blaming INEC, or internal squabbles in PDP—but here’s what matters: On June 13, 2025, INEC formally rejected the Peoples Democratic Party’s notification for its 100th National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting, scheduled for June 30—because the notice, dated May 30, carried only the signature of Acting National Chairman Umar Iliya Damagum, but not any National Secretary.
At the core: a heated battle over who legitimately holds the position of PDP National Secretary. Senator Samuel Anyanwu clings to the post, drawing on both Supreme Court recognition (March 2025) and party records. Meanwhile, Chief Sunday Ude-Okoye has been insisted upon by the PDP Board of Trustees, backed by a Court of Appeal ruling in his favor.
For INEC, this isn’t a political stance—it’s about enforcing its own rules. And when administrative confusion clouds a party’s operations, it doesn’t just stall meetings—it shakes public confidence.
In this article, we’ll explore this dispute step by step—unpacking the background, the competing claims, INEC’s reasoning, the impacts on PDP, and constructive ways to resolve the standoff—all in a clear, grounded, and highly relevant conversation.
Background
According to Part 2(12)3 of its 2022 Regulations, INEC mandates that every notification of a party convention, congress or internal meeting must bear joint signatures of the National Chairman and National Secretary.
On May 30, 2025, PDP Acting National Chairman Umar Iliya Damagum submitted a notice informing INEC of the 100th NEC meeting slated for June 30, 2025. That letter, however, carried only Damagum’s signature—there was no co-signature from any National Secretary.
On June 13, 2025, INEC Acting Secretary Haliru Aminu responded, saying the notice did not comply with section 2(12)3:
“The notice is not in compliance … the National Chairman and National Secretary of the Party shall jointly sign … and submit same to the Commission.”
Failing to secure that co-signature is not a trivial clerical slip. INEC’s regulations are strict—and non-compliance meant the 100th NEC meeting cannot proceed legitimately, raising questions about decisions made in its absence.
Beyond administrative rules lies a deeper problem: who holds the office of National Secretary? This unsigned notice reflects a critical power struggle within PDP that has stalled meetings, undermined trust among members, and crowded out meaningful discussion about policy and next steps.
The National Secretary Dispute
Let’s dive into the heart of the issue: who truly holds the title of PDP National Secretary—and why this dispute has spiraled into administrative chaos.
Claimant 1: Senator Samuel Anyanwu
Anyanwu has served as PDP National Secretary since November 2021 and was backed by Supreme Court validation on March 21, 2025, which ruled that the internal leadership issue was non‑justiciable and returned his name to party records.
Though removed by lower courts, Anyanwu secured a stay of execution pending his Supreme Court appeal. He maintains that only the apex court—not party organs—can unseat him.
In May 2025, he famously returned to the national secretariat, arguing that any directive excluding him holds no legal weight until the Supreme Court officially rules. In his own words:
“I’m in my office…These are my people and we are working.”
Claimant 2: Chief Sunday Ude-Okoye
On December 20, 2024, the Court of Appeal (Enugu) ruled that Anyanwu’s gubernatorial bid voided his National Secretary role, paving the way for Ude-Okoye’s emergence.
PDP’s National Working Committee (Feb 12, 2025) and Board of Trustees quickly endorsed Ude-Okoye and submitted resolutions to INEC for recognition.
Bolstered by backing from the South‑East caucus and Governors’ Forum, a March 2025 statement warned of mass defections if Ude-Okoye wasn’t installed—highlighting the regional stakes.
This tug‑of‑war has had tangible consequences:
Violence at HoP HQ: Reports of clashes during BoT meetings with security intervention.
Regional Rift: South‑East PDP branches threatened mass exit if their preferred secretary wasn’t recognized.
Blocking Administrative Tasks: Without a clearly recognized secretary, party processes—from NEC notices to decision-making—have stalled.
This isn’t a simple case of two names on a desk—this is a deep contest involving judicial decrees, party constitutions, regional bloc power, and legal technicalities. Each side has credible legal and political points—but until resolution, the administrative paralysis persists.
INEC’s Position & Legal Arguments
INEC’s June 13, 2025 rejection wasn’t a political move—it was about strict compliance with its 2022 Regulations. Their Acting Secretary, Haliru Aminu, wrote:
“The notice is not in compliance with the requirement of part 2(12)3 … that the National Chairman and National Secretary of the Party shall jointly sign … and submit same to the Commission.”
Legal practitioner Godwin Mbachu argues INEC misapplied its rules. He highlights that the PDP submitted notice within 21 days—as required—and that since no election or merger was planned, an amended letter signed by the Acting National Secretary would satisfy the regulation without changing the meeting date.
Political analyst Sam Amadi goes further, stating:
“An acting secretary is a secretary. A letter signed by an acting secretary is valid.”
Amadi contends that INEC’s attempt to define internal party meetings is unwarranted—especially when the PDP specifically said the meeting wasn’t for elections or party officer selection.
Commentators suggest that INEC’s strict stance contrasts sharply with its flexible handling of other parties, especially the APC—fueling allegations of selective enforcement.
INEC insists it’s enforcing its rules verbatim. But legal experts say a quick fix—adding the acting secretary’s signature to an amended notice—would solve the issue.
Still, this dispute reaches beyond procedure—it touches on the heart of how independent the party system truly is.
Internal Impacts on the PDP
The NEC—the PDP’s highest executive body—has struggled to convene amid this spat:
– April 2024: The 98th NEC drifted into adjournment without resolving major zonal disputes or the National Secretary deadlock.
– May to June 2025: The 99th NEC was postponed, aiming for June 30, but that 100th session remains indefinitely stalled after INEC’s rejection.
The result? Crippling delays on key issues—zoning decisions, committee approvals, and convention planning—threatening their organizational rhythm ahead of 2027.
This administrative gridlock mirrors growing internal division:
– Governors’ factions: Backers of Ude-Okoye include Governors Makinde, Peter Mbah, and others; champions of Anyanwu include Wike, Fintiri, and Mutfwang.
– NWC vs BoT schism: The National Working Committee and Board of Trustees have held separate, sometimes clashing, meetings—some even relocated due to security concerns.
– Zonal pressure: The South-East bloc threatened mass defection if Ude-Okoye wasn’t recognized.
As trust falters, members are jumping ship:
– April 2025: Governors Oborevwori, Okowa, and other lawmakers moved to APC amid the turmoil.
– June 2025: Akwa Ibom’s Governor Umo Eno defected, triggering discussions about expulsion of others.
These public standoffs, frequent postponements, and leadership clashes are shaping a troubling narrative:
– Organizational image: Critics argue that PDP looks disorganized and power-stricken.
– Public confidence: Electoral stakes are high, and opponents now wield this chaos as proof of the PDP’s unsuitability to govern.
Pathways to Resolution
Technical Compliance – The Immediate Fix
The quickest solution is clear—send an amended notice co‑signed by whomever is officially serving as National Secretary. Legal counsel argue this won’t alter any meeting substance; it simply satisfies INEC’s letter-of-the-law.
This alone would render the notice valid and allow the 100th NEC meeting to proceed on June 30 without further regulatory obstruction.
Legal Clarification – When Ambiguity Persists
If PDP insists on contesting INEC’s rigid interpretation, it can seek a judicial review or clarification from the court—especially around the legitimacy of an acting secretary’s signature.
Supreme Court rulings affirm internal party affairs are non‑justiciable, but procedural compliance with INEC rules may still be interpreted in court if ambiguity arises.
Internal Reconciliation – Healing the Rift
A fact-finding and reconciliation panel, chaired by former Senate President Bukola Saraki and including governors, elders, governors’ forum, and zonal reps, must meet quickly to:
1. Assess legitimate officeholders under party rules and court verdicts.
2. Facilitate a consensus decision on who should sign NEC notices moving forward.
3. Establish protocols for acting roles, succession, and conflict resolution.
Long‑Term Administrative Reform
– Fix the Constitution: Amend PDP’s internal constitution to clarify office vacation rules, succession protocol, and sign-off regulations.
– Improve record-keeping: Implement digital logs of officeholders and internal communications.
– Training & accountability: Regular compliance training and quarterly internal audits.
Lessons for Nigerian Political Parties
Prioritise Internal Democratic Standards
When internal elections, nominations, or leadership assignments lack transparency, it creates confusion and disenfranchisement, weakening the party’s structure.
Strengthen Conflict Resolution Mechanisms
Establish permanent internal dispute resolution bodies—trusted, independent committees empowered to resolve conflicts before escalation.
Formalise Administrative Protocols
Adopt administrative checklists (e.g., mandatory dual sign-off on documents) to preempt INEC rejections and legal challenges.
Guard Against Defections Through Cohesion
Maintain internal unity and transparent leadership processes to foster loyalty and reduce mass departures.
Conclusion
Administrative precision isn’t a luxury—it’s a necessity. The PDP’s current quagmire—sparked by INEC’s June 13, 2025 rejection of its NEC notice due to missing joint signatures—reveals how technical oversights can amplify deep political fractures. At the crux is a legal and partisan showdown between Senator Samuel Anyanwu and Chief Sunday Ude‑Okoye. Each camp has credible legal bases—and each plays a role in the breakdown of communication, cohesion, and public trust.
INEC is clear: its concerns are procedural, not political. But the PDP’s failure to comply underscores its internal chaos—and leaves the party vulnerable to regulatory backlash and negative public perception.
To move forward, PDP needs a three-pronged strategy:
– Quick compliance fix—Amend that NEC notice with a duly authorized signature.
– Legal clarity—Pursue court review if INEC remains inflexible.
– Institutional renewal—Adopt internal reconciliation mechanisms and administrative reforms.
A missing signature may appear insignificant—but in this case, it exposed systemic fractures that could define the PDP’s future. The opportunity now lies in converting this administrative error into a turning point—one that demonstrates renewed discipline, democratic depth, and operational competence. For the PDP, the clock is ticking; but with swift action and structural integrity, recovery and resurgence are within sight.
