Nenadi Usman's position as Labour Party chairman is confirmed as appellate judges reject Abure's legal challenge.

A three-member panel of the Court of Appeal in Abuja has dismissed the appeal filed by Julius Abure challenging the leadership of the Labour Party, affirming the Federal High Court’s recognition of Senator Nenadi Usman as the party’s legitimate national chairman and slapping Abure with a N10 million cost for abuse of court process.

n

In the lead judgment delivered by Justice Oyejoju Oyewumi, the appellate court upheld the earlier decision of Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court, which on January 21 had reaffirmed the Supreme Court’s removal of Abure as Labour Party National Chairman and directed the Independent National Electoral Commission to recognise Usman as the party’s legitimate leader to the exclusion of all others.

n

The Court of Appeal further held that the Supreme Court had on April 4, 2025, conclusively settled the Labour Party leadership dispute when it nullified the convention that purportedly returned Abure as national chairman — a determination the appellate court said left no room for further litigation on the matter.

n

The court agreed with the trial court that Section 251 of the Constitution empowered it to compel a statutory federal government agency to perform its functions, thereby validating the order directing INEC to recognise Usman.

n

It equally upheld the constitution of the Caretaker Committee headed by Usman as a doctrine of necessity necessitated by a leadership vacuum within the party.

n

The justices were particularly critical of Abure’s conduct throughout the proceedings, censuring him for forum shopping at a Nasarawa State High Court on a matter already conclusively decided by the Supreme Court, and for persisting in claiming the party’s leadership in defiance of clear judicial pronouncements.

n

Finding the appeal devoid of merit and constituting an abuse of court process, the court imposed a N10 million cost against Abure for wasting judicial time.

n

Reacting to the judgment, Usman described the ruling as a victory for democracy and the rule of law, commending the judiciary for its courage and steadfastness in upholding justice despite attempts by certain elements to undermine its integrity.