Court Battle Erupts Over ₦20m APC Forms in Anambra

There is growing disquiet within the Anambra State chapter of the All Progressives Congress (APC), as 21 ward chairmanship aspirants have dragged the party before the Federal High Court sitting in Awka over its alleged failure to conduct democratic congresses.

The aspirants are asking the court for a declaration that, despite being entitled, they were not issued forms for the party’s ward congresses.

On February 18, 2026, the Anambra State APC conducted ward and local government congresses across the state.

According to the applicants, they paid a total sum of N20 million into the party’s coffers. They argue that, had the forms been issued, they would have participated in the ward screening exercise and the congresses held on February 18, 2026, or on any adjourned date, in accordance with the party’s electoral guidelines.

Chief G. Tagbo Ike (SAN), counsel to the 21 applicants, led a team of 11 other lawyers from the chambers of Ike, Ike and Associates, Arena of Law, Carr Street, Enugu, in filing Suit No: FHC/AWK/CS/50/2026 on February 16, 2026, at the Federal High Court, Awka Judicial Division.

The case is being presided over by Hon. Justice Bala Khalifa Mohammed Usman.

The applicants instituted the suit both in their individual capacities as aspirants to the offices of ward chairmen and in a representative capacity on behalf of all aspirants to the same offices across the 21 local government areas of Anambra State during the February 18, 2026 congresses.

Joined in the suit as respondents are the All Progressives Congress (APC) as the first respondent; Prof. Nentawe Yilwatda, National Chairman of the APC; Senator Ajibola Basiru, National Secretary; H.E. Hon. Aminu Bello Masari, Chairman of APC Nationwide Congresses and Convention; and Hon. Basil Ejidike, sued both personally and as a representative of the State Executive Committee (SEC) of the Anambra APC.

Also joined are Senator Uche Ekwunife, Chairperson of the State Caucus and Consensus Committee of the APC in Anambra State, and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), listed as the 2nd to 7th respondents respectively.

In their statement of claim, the applicants assert that they are financially up-to-date members of the APC, a registered political party in Nigeria, and aspirants to the offices of ward chairmen across the 21 local government areas of the state.

They state that they are prosecuting the suit for themselves and as representatives of aspirants across 305 of the 326 wards in Anambra State, excluding co-aspirants allegedly aligned with the 5th and 6th respondents.

Among the reliefs sought is a declaration that the failure of the first respondent to issue forms after payment constitutes discrimination and breaches the party’s electoral guidelines, as well as Sections 40 and 42 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), and the obligations implicit in Exhibit “B,” being the adjusted APC 2026 schedule of nationwide congresses, national convention, and related activities.

The applicants also seek a declaration that the first respondent is obliged to refund the sum of N20,000,000.00 (Twenty Million Naira) paid by them if no ward congresses were conducted with their participation.

They further seek a perpetual injunction restraining the 1st to 6th respondents from conducting the February 18, 2026 ward congresses in Anambra State, or on any adjourned date, until the applicants are issued forms, screened, and allowed to contest.

In addition, they seek a perpetual mandatory order setting aside the ward congresses conducted in the 326 wards of Anambra State, should it be established that such congresses were held without their participation.

The applicants also pray the court to award N100,000,000.00 (One Hundred Million Naira) against the 1st respondent, and jointly and severally against the 2nd to 6th respondents, for breach of the APC Constitution and the adjusted APC 2026 schedule of nationwide congresses and related activities, as well as exemplary and general damages for the inconveniences suffered.

They argue that, as members of the APC—a voluntary association under Section 40 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended)—and as aspirants, they have the right to contest for ward chairmanship positions across all 326 wards in the state during the February 18 congresses.

Citing Article 27 of the APC Constitution, the applicants note that party offices have a tenure of four years and contend that the tenure of office holders in Anambra State had expired prior to the scheduled nationwide congresses of February 18, 2026.

They further state that bulk payments were made on February 9, 2026, alongside other aspirants to local government offices. However, they allege that the secretariats of the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th respondents failed to issue the forms, despite payment having been made in the name of J.P.C. Millan Nig. Ltd.

The applicants maintain that the forms were never issued to them, notwithstanding the payment of N20,000,000.00 into the 1st respondent’s account (Account No: 1223069612) with Zenith Bank Plc.

They  also allege that certain underhanded tactics by the 5th and 6th respondents were aimed at frustrating the conduct of free and fair congresses in Anambra State. 

In response, they, along with other party members, wrote an open letter to the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th respondents outlining these concerns.

According to them, the letter urged the party leadership to ensure free, fair, and transparent congresses; however, no action was taken.

 They assert that the failure of the party leadership to check the actions of the 5th and 6th respondents effectively denied them the opportunity to contest for party offices.

They argue that seeking judicial intervention has become inevitable in order to check what they describe as the excesses of the 5th and 6th respondents. 

They further contended that it is unconscionable and inequitable for the 1st respondent to collect N20,000,000.00 from them for the purpose of purchasing forms and then fail to provide those forms.

They describe this as unjust enrichment, recoverable in law where no forms were made available.

“In the circumstances, the 1st respondent and its principal officers, being the 2nd to 6th respondents, have treated the applicants unfairly.

“It is imperative to suspend the ward congresses of February 18, 2026, pending the resolution of this dispute, and to compel the 1st respondent and its principal officers to issue the forms, allow the applicants to undergo screening, and participate in the congresses.

“In the event that the ward congresses proceed without the participation of the applicants, such congresses should be set aside.”

They maintain that granting the reliefs sought is in the interest of justice.