06/04/2025
The Fall of Abure’s Leadership: A Legal and Logical Reckoning
….The lesson is stark: in politics as in law, denial may delay the truth, but it cannot defeat it.
The saga of Julius Abure and his National Working Committee (NWC) within Nigeria’s Labour Party has unfolded like a series of laughable pranks, each more absurd than the last. Yet, beneath the surface of this political theater lies a serious lesson in legal consistency and strategic maneuvering. Abure and his allies cannot approbate and reprobate simultaneously—celebrating judicial victories when they suit them while decrying the courts when the tide turns.
The appellants opposing Abure, however, have demonstrated a shrewder understanding of judicial limits and possibilities, securing a decisive blow against his leadership charade. This write up is done to explores how the Supreme Court’s ruling has stripped Abure of legitimacy, exposing the futility of his manipulations and affirming the appellants’ calculated approach.
The crux of this dispute lies in the judiciary’s role—or lack thereof—in appointing or declaring party officials. Abure’s camp has argued that no court can appoint or declare anyone a party official, a point they wielded to dismiss the appellants’ efforts. Yet, this stance conveniently ignores a critical nuance: while courts may not have the power to install leaders, they undeniably possess the authority to declare someone unfit or ineligible, as they have now done with Abure and his NWC. The appellants, recognizing this distinction, did not seek the Supreme Court’s blessing to be declared Labour Party leaders—a request that would have overstepped judicial bounds. Instead, they pursued a remedy well within the court’s purview: a definitive ruling to end Abure’s masquerade as chairman. This strategic clarity underscores their intelligence and exposes the folly of Abure’s denial.
Abure’s troubles began when his tenure as Labour Party chairman expired, a fact acknowledged by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and key party stakeholders. Refusing to step aside, he sought judicial intervention, praying that the court compel INEC to recognize him as the legitimate leader. When a lower court granted this request, Abure and his supporters rejoiced, hailing the decision as a triumph. Their celebration, however, proved premature.
The Supreme Court has since set aside that judgment, ruling that it lacked jurisdiction—a legal rebuke that dismantles the foundation of Abure’s claim. More damning still, the apex court explicitly stated that Abure’s tenure had long expired, a pronouncement so clear that no amount of manipulation, argument, or explanation can obscure it. The truth stands unassailable: Abure is now, officially, the ex-chairman of the Labour Party.
This outcome reveals the appellants’ approach as not only smarter but also more aligned with legal realities. Rather than chasing an impossible declaration of leadership from the Supreme Court, they sought what the judiciary could deliver: a final, authoritative end to Abure’s pretensions. Their success highlights the limits of Abure’s strategy, which relied on a shaky judicial lifeline that has now been severed. No manipulation can cover the truth in this case, as the Supreme Court’s ruling leaves no room for ambiguity. Abure’s leadership, once propped up by a flawed court order, has crumbled under the weight of its own expiration.
The downfall of Julius Abure and his NWC serves as a cautionary tale of overreach and denial. His insistence on clinging to power, bolstered by a now-overturned judgment, reflects a pattern of laughable missteps that could not withstand scrutiny. The appellants, by contrast, played a wiser game, leveraging the courts’ power to invalidate rather than create. With Abure’s tenure officially consigned to history, the Labour Party can now move beyond this chapter of farce and reckoning.
Oluchi Oparah
Fmr National Treasurer
Labour Party
06/04/25
