SDP Crisis: Court Adjourns Criminal Case To July 28 Over Delay In Bank Documents

A Magistrate Court in Wuse has adjourned the criminal case arising from the leadership dispute within the Social Democratic party, SDP, to July 28, 2026, following the inability of the prosecution to obtain key banking documents required for the continuation of hearing.

Chairman of the party, Professor Sadiq Gombe, after proceedings told newsmen that the adjournment became necessary because a crucial bank statement intended to be tendered as evidence was yet to be produced by the financial institution involved.

According to him, efforts were initially made to obtain the document directly from the bank, but the institution could not release it within the required timeframe.

He explained that the legal team subsequently approached the court registry to secure a subpoena compelling the bank to produce the statement.

The Chairman said the bank informed the court that the document is voluminous and requires approval from its headquarters as well as official certification before it can be released.

As a result, the prosecution sought additional time, prompting the court to adjourn the matter until July 28 for continuation of hearing.

Speaking on the political implications of the case, Professor Gombe dismissed claims of factionalization within the SDP, insisting that the dispute involves only a few members subjected to disciplinary measures.

He maintained that the party acted in accordance with its constitution, the Electoral Act, and the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in sanctioning the affected members.

According to him, the disciplinary actions were ratified by the appropriate organs of the party and duly communicated to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

The Chairman said the party’s National Working Committee, NWC, and National Executive Committee, NEC, followed due process before approving the suspension and eventual expulsion of the affected members.

He argued that the sanctioned individuals neither exhausted the party’s internal appeal mechanisms nor challenged their expulsion before a competent court within the stipulated period.

Professor Gombe further insisted that internal disciplinary matters remain the exclusive responsibility of political parties and are protected under existing laws and judicial precedents.

Addressing allegations surrounding the occupation of the party’s national secretariat, he claimed that rival elements, aided by security operatives, forcefully gained access to the premises in March while key party officials were away preparing for the party’s convention.

He alleged that the action was intended to disrupt preparations for the convention, which later proceeded as scheduled and produced the party’s presidential candidate.

Despite the dispute over the secretariat, he said the party has continued its operations from an alternative location while pursuing legal and administrative remedies.

He expressed confidence that the court process would ultimately vindicate the party’s leadership, insisting that all actions taken so far have been lawful and consistent with the SDP constitution.