The Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA) has queried the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)’s failure to fully implement judicial decisions relating to the leadership structure of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

The group through its national coordinator, Emmanuel Onwubiko, stated that it is compelled by its constitutional mandate to defend the rule of law and democratic accountability to publicly demand that INEC explain to Nigerians why it has allegedly failed to fully implement the court judicial decisions. Of particular concern, the group noted, is the refusal of INEC to publicly recognise and implement the leadership arrangements reportedly constituted by the PDP Board of Trustees under the interim leadership of Alhaji Tanimu Turaki, SAN, despite judicial pronouncements that have raised fundamental questions regarding the legitimacy of certain existing party structures.

“The central issue is straightforward: Why is INEC appearing to selectively respond to developments within the PDP while remaining silent on judicial decisions that carry significant legal implications for the party’s leadership and administrative framework?

” INEC was established as an independent constitutional body charged with the responsibility of conducting elections and regulating political parties in strict compliance with the Constitution and the laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

“It was not created to choose which court judgments to acknowledge and which to ignore.

” Recent judicial decisions have generated serious legal questions concerning the status of certain PDP officials, the validity of suspensions, the legal consequences of the Supreme Court’s nullification of the Ibadan Convention, and actions subsequently taken by individuals and structures linked to that convention.
” These are legal questions requiring legal compliance. They are not matters for political convenience or administrative discretion, the group stated.
HURIWA noted with concern the growing perception among many PDP members and democratic stakeholders that powerful political interests may be benefiting from institutional reluctance to fully address the legal consequences of these judicial pronouncements. ” “Whether such perceptions are accurate or not, INEC bears a constitutional responsibility to conduct itself in a manner that leaves no room for doubts about its neutrality, independence, and fidelity to the rule of law.
“Furthermore, the recent judgment of the Court of Appeal concerning the status of the former National Legal Adviser, A.K. Ajibade (SAN), has introduced significant legal consequences that cannot be ignored.
” The Court expressly held that Ajibade’s tenure expired in December 2025 and found no evidence establishing any valid re-election thereafter.

“The implication of that finding is profound because any legal instructions, authorisations, or processes purportedly undertaken by him after the expiration of his tenure would lack legal validity.”

The appellate court stated:”While I agree that the suspension of A.K. Ajibade, SAN, elapsed after one month from November 1, 2025; yet his tenure of office expired in December, 2025. A.K. Ajibade, SAN, either way could not have issued a valid letter of instruction thereafter, unless there was an intervening circumstance.”

The judgment further observed that there was no credible evidence establishing any re-election of Ajibade as National Legal Adviser.

” The legal effect of this judgment has raised serious questions regarding the legitimacy of the March 29, 2026 convention reportedly conducted by the faction associated with the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Chief Nyesom Wike, since the legal foundation upon which the convention was convened has been substantially challenged by the court’s findings.”

Consequently, HURIWA asked INEC to publicly explain Why it has not clearly communicated its position regarding the legal consequences of these judicial pronouncements.Why it has allegedly failed to recognise and implement the interim leadership structure reportedly constituted by the PDP Board of Trustees under Alhaji Tanimu Turaki, SAN.What specific legal basis supports any continued recognition of structures whose legitimacy has become the subject of adverse judicial findings.

Whether the Commission has undertaken any internal legal review of the implications of the Court of Appeal judgment and related court decisions affecting the PDP. The rule of law requires more than court judgments on paper. It requires faithful implementation by public institutions. No democracy can thrive where judicial decisions are perceived to have no practical consequences. No electoral management body can maintain public confidence if citizens begin to believe that political considerations outweigh constitutional obligations.

HURIWA called on INEC to immediately provide clarity to Nigerians and to demonstrate through its actions that it remains an independent constitutional institution guided solely by law, justice, and democratic principles.

“The judiciary must be respected.Court judgments must be enforced.Political influence must never supersede constitutional authority.

” Nigeria’s democracy depends on the integrity of its institutions and the supremacy of the rule of law,” the group stated.