The Social Democratic Party (SDP) has distanced itself from a lawsuit challenging the timetable released by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), alleging that the action was instituted without the approval or authorisation of the party by its former National Secretary, Dr. Olu Agunloye.
In a statement signed by Mallam Lawan Ruwan on Wednesday, the party described the development as an act of impunity and a violation of due process, insisting that Agunloye lacked the lawful authority to institute legal proceedings on behalf of the party.
The party said that the suit, which sought to challenge aspects of the electoral timetable ahead of the 2027 General Elections, was filed solely on the initiative of Agunloye and did not represent the position of the SDP or any of its constitutionally recognized organs.
According to the SDP, documents and correspondence exchanged between Agunloye and the legal practitioner engaged for the litigation showed that the former national secretary independently retained legal services and initiated the suit without any mandate from the party leadership.
The party further claimed that the correspondence revealed that the legal action was undertaken on the strength of personal instructions allegedly issued by Agunloye, rather than any decision of the National Working Committee (NWC), National Executive Committee (NEC), or any other competent organ of the party.
Among the documents cited by the SDP is a letter written by Shaibu Enejo Aruwa (SAN), in which the lawyer referenced conversations and messages allegedly exchanged with Agunloye regarding the institution of the suit against INEC and other parties.
The SDP argued that the contents of the correspondence contradicted claims that the litigation had been properly authorized by the party, maintaining that no resolution or directive was issued empowering Agunloye to commence legal proceedings in the party’s name.
Party officials expressed concern that the suit could create unnecessary distractions and potentially disrupt preparations for the 2027 General Elections, warning that unauthorised actions taken in the name of the party could undermine its internal processes and public image.
“The lawsuit was neither discussed nor approved by the appropriate organs of the party. It was a unilateral action taken without the knowledge, consent, or authorisation of the SDP,” the statement said.
The party therefore announced its complete dissociation from the suit, identified as FHC/ABJ/CS/720/2026, as well as from all filings, representations, and actions connected with the matter.
It urged members of the public, political stakeholders, and relevant institutions to disregard any suggestion that the litigation reflected the official position of the SDP.
The party reaffirmed its commitment to the rule of law, internal democracy, and due process, stressing that only duly authorized officials and organs of the party could take decisions or initiate actions on its behalf.
The controversy comes amid heightened political activities and preparations by political parties for the 2027 general elections, with the SDP insisting that its focus remains on strengthening its structures and complying with all lawful electoral processes.
