Crisis looms as Reps minority lawmakers meet today over alleged plan to sack Wike’s loyalist

The Minority Caucus of the House of Representatives is set to convene in Abuja today (Monday) to deliberate on the legal action filed by its leader, Hon. Kingsley Chinda, amid growing tension within the opposition ranks.

Chinda, who currently leads the caucus, recently instituted a lawsuit seeking to stop what he described as an “orchestrated plot” to remove him from his position.

A notice of meeting issued on Sunday and jointly signed by Agbedi Frederick (Peoples Democratic Party), Afam Ogene (Labour Party), Muktar Umar-Zakari (New Nigeria Peoples Party), and Peter Uzokwe (Young Peoples Party) listed the agenda as: “Response to the lawsuit instituted by House Minority Leader, Rt. Hon. Kingsley Chinda, against all minority parties and any other business.”

Last week, Chinda, in a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1936/2025 and filed before the Federal High Court, Abuja, on September 25, 2025, alleged moves to oust him as Minority Leader over his perceived closeness to the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike.

The Rivers lawmaker argued that his removal would be unconstitutional and a violation of his fundamental right to freedom of association.

He therefore prayed the court to restrain the defendants from proceeding with the alleged plot.

Listed as 1st to 12th defendants are the National Assembly, Clerk of the National Assembly, House of Representatives, Speaker of the House, Clerk of the House, Peoples Democratic Party, Labour Party, New Nigeria Peoples Party, All Progressives Grand Alliance, Social Democratic Party, African Democratic Congress, and Young Progressive Party.

The defendants were said to have resolved to remove Chinda on the grounds that his leadership had contributed to the perception of the legislature as a “rubber stamp” of the executive arm.

Chinda is reportedly viewed by some opposition lawmakers as compromised and ineffective. They are said to have concluded plans to unseat him when the House reconvenes from recess on Tuesday, October 7.

Critics accuse Chinda’s leadership of being overly cozy with the ruling All Progressives Congress, allegedly weakening the opposition’s ability to hold the government accountable on key national issues such as widespread hardship, insecurity, and corruption.

He is also accused of failing to convene a single minority caucus meeting since the inauguration of the 10th Assembly more than two years ago and of making public statements that contradict the PDP’s collective stance.

In his writ, Chinda sought several declarations and injunctions, including:

“A declaration that the move to remove the plaintiff from his position as Minority Leader of the House of Representatives on account of his association with Barrister Ezenwo Nyesom Wike, a member of the Peoples Democratic Party, is a violation of his right to freedom of association as guaranteed under Section 40 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).”

He also urged the court to declare that the defendants lack the legal authority to remove him arbitrarily without complying with Order 7 Rule 14 of the Standing Orders of the House and to restrain them from acting on any purported removal notice.

In his statement of claim, Chinda, who represents Obio/Akpor Federal Constituency of Rivers State, said his party, the PDP, remains the largest among minority parties in the 360-member House, with about 83 lawmakers, followed by the Labour Party (22), NNPP (15), APGA (5), SDP (2), ADC (1), and YPP (1). The APC, he noted, holds the majority with 233 members.

He explained that the PDP’s numerical strength among minority parties entitled it to produce the Minority Leader, a position he currently occupies. He maintained that the only reason cited for the plot to remove him was his association with Wike, who, like him, belongs to the PDP’s Rivers State chapter.

Chinda further argued that the Standing Orders of the House provide that any change in party leadership must follow due notice and be supported by a majority of members of the concerned parties. He noted that no such notice had been issued and that the House had been on recess since July 23, 2025.

He alleged that while most minority members are currently away, some PDP lawmakers have been holding clandestine meetings to lobby members of other minority parties to support his removal before resumption and to present their resolution to the Speaker.

“From my legislative experience,” he said, “overwhelming political pressure may be brought to bear on the 1st–5th defendants to endorse an illegal exercise aimed at my removal, which is imminent.”

According to him, while the PDP National Executive Committee met on August 25, 2025, some PDP members in the House simultaneously convened a meeting where his removal was discussed and deferred for further deliberation.

He added that a report published on September 6, 2025, indicated that the 6th–12th defendants had already resolved to remove him and his deputy, citing his relationship with the FCT Minister as justification.

Chinda said he resorted to the court because he was neither informed nor invited to any meeting where such a decision was taken.

“By parliamentary practice,” he argued, “there must be a cogent reason for the removal of a House officer, and my association with a member of my Federal Constituency does not qualify as one.”

He warned that unless the court intervenes, his unlawful removal could spark chaos in the House and destabilise governance at the federal level.

Chinda therefore urged the court to restrain the defendants from acting on the purported decision and to protect his right to freedom of association under the Constitution.

(Punch)