Supreme Court Delivers Final Blow To Gabam In SDP Leadership Dispute

• The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed an appeal filed by former Social Democratic Party National Chairman, Shehu Gabam, over the party’s leadership dispute, effectively affirming Prof. Abubakar Sadiq Gombe as the party’s National Chairman.

• A five-member panel led by Justice Adamu Jauro ruled that the appeal had become irrelevant, ending another stage of a prolonged legal battle that has travelled through the Federal High Court and Court of Appeal to the apex court.

• SDP presidential candidate and counsel to the party, Prince Adewole Adebayo, said the ruling had effectively ended Gabam’s claim to the party leadership, arguing that Gabam had already been removed and had not personally challenged his removal.

• The ruling comes as the SDP prepares for the 2027 general elections while pursuing two other cases against INEC at the Supreme Court over the electoral timetable and the periods available for candidate nomination and substitution.

September 16, () – The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, dismissed an appeal filed by former National Chairman of the Social Democratic Party, Shehu Gabam, in the prolonged leadership dispute rocking the party.

The judgement effectively affirmed Prof. Abubakar Sadiq Gombe as the National Chairman of the SDP and represents another major development in the legal battle over the control of the opposition party.

The five-member panel, led by Justice Adamu Jauro and comprising Justices Haruna Tsammani, A.A. Adumein, Jonah Adah and Joseph Oyewole, dismissed the appeal on the grounds that it had become irrelevant.

The dispute over the leadership of the SDP has passed through the Federal High Court and Court of Appeal before reaching the Supreme Court, with the conflicting legal proceedings creating uncertainty over the party’s recognised leadership.

Reacting to Wednesday’s judgement, SDP presidential candidate and counsel to the party, Prince Adewole Adebayo, said the decision had effectively brought Gabam’s leadership claim to an end.

“The Supreme Court said that there is no life in the case and dismissed the case. That is the end of Shehu Gabam. There is nothing about the SDP leadership crisis coming up again”, Adebayo said.

He explained that Gabam had already been removed from the party and had not challenged his removal, adding that the original suit was instituted by another party member seeking recognition for Gabam.

According to Adebayo, the SDP subsequently approached the Court of Appeal to challenge the Federal High Court judgement and obtained an order setting it aside.

“We argued the case that the Court of Appeal should correct that judge, and the Court of Appeal set aside the judgement”, he added.

The development comes as the SDP seeks to consolidate its structure ahead of the 2027 general elections, following months of litigation over its leadership and other issues involving the Independent National Electoral Commission.

Adebayo, however, disclosed that two other cases involving the SDP and INEC remained before the Supreme Court. He said the cases relate to INEC’s electoral timetable, particularly what the party considers a reduction in the statutory periods available to political parties for the nomination and substitution of candidates.

Adebayo stressed that the cases were not instituted because the SDP was unable to comply with INEC’s timetable, but to secure judicial clarification on the commission’s powers and ensure that the electoral process was conducted within the law.

“The reason we brought the case to court is not that we, particularly SDP, are not able to cope with the timetable. It is to limit the abuse of the electoral process by INEC”, he stated.

He maintained that INEC must exercise its powers within the limits prescribed by law.

Also reacting to the Supreme Court judgment, Gombe described the decision as a victory for the SDP and democracy.

“This is a victory not only for the SDP, but a victory for democracy”, he said.

Gombe said the leadership dispute had passed through several stages of litigation before eventually reaching the apex court.

He argued that the party’s repeated appearances before the courts should be viewed within the broader context of its commitment to democratic governance rather than merely as attempts to protect its organisational interests.

“Whenever you see the SDP in any of the courts, either the Federal, the Court of Appeal, or here (apex court), we are always here in defence of democracy, not just in defence of SDP as a party”, he said.