In a dramatic turn of events, former Benue State Governor Samuel Ortom has set the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) National Disciplinary Committee an urgent 48-hour deadline to retract a public statement he claims defamed him. The controversial statement, issued on February 5, 2025, announced an inquiry into alleged petitions against Ortom, and according to his legal counsel, it has caused significant damage to his reputation.
Ortom’s lawyer, C.T. Mue Esq., fired a legal salvo in response to the public inquiry, demanding an apology from the PDP, accusing them of violating both the party’s own constitution and Nigeria’s Cybercrimes Act. Ortom’s legal team argues that the announcement not only humiliated the former governor but also breached his right to a fair hearing.
“The public release of the inquiry into these petitions against Our Client without formal notification or any chance for a hearing is an affront to justice,” Mue said in the letter addressed to the PDP’s National Disciplinary Committee. “We demand that the National Disciplinary Committee immediately withdraw the press release and issue a formal apology to our client.”
The Legal Fight
The dispute centers on the statement issued by the PDP’s National Disciplinary Committee on February 5, which publicly revealed that the party had launched an inquiry into alleged petitions against Ortom. While the party did not specify the nature of the petitions, the damage, according to Ortom’s camp, was already done.
Mue’s letter goes on to highlight several provisions from the PDP Constitution that, according to the lawyer, were violated. In particular, Section 57(4) of the PDP Constitution requires that any member who is the subject of an inquiry must be formally notified of the allegations in writing, with details about the hearing. Ortom, according to Mue, never received such a notification before the public statement was issued.
Furthermore, Mue asserts that Ortom’s position as a former governor places him under the protection of Section 57(7) of the PDP Constitution. This section mandates that only the National Executive Committee (NEC) can entertain any disciplinary actions involving high-ranking members such as Ortom. The lawyer argues that the National Disciplinary Committee thus lacks the jurisdiction to initiate such an inquiry.
“This is a procedural breach,” Mue noted, asserting that the PDP’s actions lacked both legal and constitutional foundation.
The legal response also cited Nigeria’s Cybercrimes Act 2015, which criminalizes the intentional dissemination of false or misleading information that causes harm to an individual’s reputation. According to Ortom’s legal team, the premature announcement of the inquiry—without proper formal communication—amounts to a violation of the Cybercrimes Act. They argue that the press release not only caused “annoyance and inconvenience” but also “damaged [Ortom’s] reputation.”
Ortom’s Demand: Immediate Action or Legal Consequences
The former governor’s legal team is adamant that the matter be addressed quickly. In addition to a formal written apology, they demand that the disciplinary committee refrain from making any further public comments regarding Ortom’s case unless he is officially informed and given an opportunity to respond.
Failure to meet these demands within the 48-hour window, the letter warns, will compel Ortom to pursue legal action, including a defamation lawsuit. Ortom’s team is also prepared to report the matter to law enforcement agencies for violations of the Cybercrimes Act.
“Our Client expects justice to be done swiftly,” Mue wrote. “We trust that the PDP will act in accordance with the principles of fairness, transparency, and due process.”
Reactions from PDP
As of the time of writing, the PDP has yet to respond officially to Ortom’s legal demand. However, sources within the party have indicated that the committee’s action may have been a result of internal political pressures, but the public nature of the announcement has backfired.
Some party members have already voiced concerns over the manner in which the matter was handled. A senior PDP source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, expressed reservations about the potential legal ramifications. “The committee may have acted too hastily. This could escalate into a very public legal battle for the party,” the source remarked.
On the other hand, some within the PDP have argued that Ortom’s demand for an apology is an attempt to deflect attention from the ongoing internal investigations. These members contend that the party has every right to examine allegations against its members, regardless of their past positions or influence.
However, as tensions rise, the PDP’s next steps remain uncertain. The party could face significant reputational damage if it fails to act promptly, as public perception of political fairness and justice is often a critical factor in Nigeria’s volatile political environment.
Ortom’s Political Future
For Ortom, this latest confrontation with the PDP comes amid an already complex political landscape. Having served as Benue State Governor from 2015 to 2023, Ortom is seen by some as a strong voice within the PDP, particularly on issues of state autonomy and justice for the middle-belt region. However, his relationship with national party leadership has been increasingly strained in recent years.
Sources suggest that the ongoing dispute may signal a broader shift in Ortom’s political trajectory. Some believe that his recent public stance against the PDP could pave the way for an independent political future, though others speculate that he may be positioning himself for a future role outside of party lines.
Whether Ortom’s claims against the PDP hold legal merit or not, the case has undoubtedly brought the party’s internal conflicts to the forefront of public debate, just as Nigeria prepares for the upcoming 2027 general elections.
A Test of Party Integrity
This developing story represents more than just a legal confrontation. It underscores the growing tension between party loyalty and individual rights within Nigerian politics. Ortom’s fight is not only a personal battle over reputation but also a reflection of broader concerns about transparency, fairness, and due process within political institutions.
As the clock ticks down on Ortom’s 48-hour ultimatum, all eyes will be on the PDP—will they seek to resolve the matter quietly, or will they risk a prolonged legal battle that could tarnish the party’s image even further?
For now, Ortom’s next move is clear: if the PDP does not apologize, he will not hesitate to take them to court.
