Follow Us on Google
The leadership crisis rocking the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) has taken a new turn as Musibau Olayiwola, who describes himself as the duly elected Southwest Zonal Chairman of the party, has approached the Federal High Court sitting in Ibadan, seeking an interim injunction to halt the party’s forthcoming National/General Convention scheduled to hold in Bauchi on August 12 and 13, 2026.
Olayiwola, in a suit filed before the Ibadan Judicial Division of the Federal High Court, is challenging what he described as the alleged refusal of the party’s national leadership to issue him a nomination form to enable the ratification of his position at the forthcoming convention.
The defendants named in the suit are the Allied Peoples Movement; its National Chairman, Yusuf Mamman Dantalle; its National Secretary, Oyadeyi Ayodele Adebayo; the Chairman of the Planning Committee for the National Convention; and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
In an affidavit of extreme urgency filed in support of the application, Olayiwola stated that he was elected Southwest Zonal Chairman at the party’s congress held on May 23, 2026.
According to him, the party’s guidelines require elected officers to obtain nomination forms to enable their positions to be ratified at the National Convention.
He alleged that after his election, he approached the national leadership of the party for the nomination form but was refused.
The applicant further claimed that his repeated efforts to obtain the form had proved unsuccessful, adding that he was eventually informed that he could no longer obtain the nomination form.
The court document stated: “Without the nomination form, my position as democratically elected Zonal Chairman of Southwest will not be ratified.”
Olayiwola further argued that failure to ratify his position would amount to a denial of his alleged constitutional and political rights, including his right to participate fully in the affairs of the party.
He also alleged that the nomination form meant for him had been given to another individual who, according to him, did not participate in the Southwest Zonal Congress and did not emerge as the elected Zonal Chairman.
The applicant maintained that such an action would be inconsistent with the APM Constitution and the guidelines governing the party’s congresses.
He told the court that the Southwest Congress was conducted peacefully and that the results were declared after the exercise, with him emerging as Zonal Chairman.
He further stated that copies of the results and the accompanying report were forwarded to INEC.
Olayiwola consequently urged the court to intervene before the scheduled convention, arguing that allowing the convention to proceed without resolving the dispute could undermine his claim to the office.
Seeks injunction against APM, INEC
In the motion ex parte, the applicant asked the Federal High Court to grant an interim injunction restraining the first to fourth defendants, their agents, privies, associates or anyone acting through them from proceeding with the National/General Convention slated for August 12 and 13 in Bauchi, pending the hearing and final determination of the motion on notice.
He also asked the court to restrain INEC from attending or monitoring the convention pending the determination of the application.
The applicant argued that the urgency of the matter arose from the proximity of the convention and the possibility that his alleged grievance could become difficult to remedy if the convention proceeded before the substantive dispute was determined.
In his affidavit, he stated that if his position was not ratified at the convention, his right to occupy the office into which he claimed to have been democratically elected would be denied.
He also alleged that the party’s action amounted to an attempt to replace democratically elected officers with individuals who did not emerge through the prescribed congress process.
The document quoted the applicant as saying that “imposition of candidate as officers of the party executives is no longer allowed under our laws.”
Cites democratic principles
The applicant’s legal team also argued that political parties are required to conduct their internal affairs in accordance with democratic principles.
In their written address in support of the motion, counsel relied on several judicial authorities on the principles governing interlocutory injunctions, including Obeya Memorial Specialist Hospital v. Attorney-General of the Federation, Kotoye v. CBN, CBN v. S.A.P. Nigeria Ltd., Akapo v. Hakeem-Habeeb and Effion v. Iron Bar.
The lawyers submitted that their client had demonstrated the existence of a legal right capable of protection and that there was a serious issue to be tried.
They also argued that damages would not constitute adequate compensation if the convention was allowed to proceed and another person was allegedly installed in the disputed position.
According to the written address, the applicant could be prevented from contesting for the position again for several years if the alleged violation was allowed to occur before the court determined the substantive suit.
The lawyers therefore urged the court to preserve the status quo pending the determination of the substantive case.
APM convention hangs in the balance
The development comes at a sensitive moment for the APM as the party prepares for its National/General Convention in Bauchi.
The court process has now placed the party’s internal electoral and administrative procedures under judicial scrutiny, particularly regarding the recognition and ratification of officers emerging from the party’s zonal congresses.
The applicant has also given an undertaking as to damages in the event that the court ultimately finds that the application was frivolous or that the interim order should not have been granted.
However, the allegations contained in the affidavit remain the claims of the applicant and have yet to be determined by the court. The court document reviewed for this report does not establish that the allegations against the APM leadership or any of the other defendants have been proved.
The suit therefore sets the stage for a potentially significant legal battle over the validity of the Southwest zonal leadership and the processes leading to the party’s forthcoming national convention.
As the August 12–13 convention approaches, attention is now focused on the Federal High Court in Ibadan and whatever decision the court may take on the request to preserve the status quo pending the determination of the substantive dispute.
