The Federal High Court sitting in Akure, the Ondo State capital has disqualified the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate for the Ondo State governorship election, Lucky Aiyedatiwa from seeking re-election.
Aiyedatiwa who is the outgoing governor, was disqualified by Justice Toyin Bolaji Adegoke on the ground that the 1999 constitution as amended did not provide for a situation where an elected President, Vice President, Governor, and Deputy would spend more than eight years in office.
The APC candidate who was deputy to late Governor Oluwarotimi Akeredolu, sworn-in in December 27, 2023, to complete the tenure. He was again sworn-in on February 24, 2025, as governor when he defeated Agboola Ajayi, then candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).
An APC member, Dr. Akin Egbuwalo had dragged the governor, his Deputy, Dr. Olayide Adelami, and the ruling party to court over the eligibility of Aiyedatiwa to contest for another term in office.
Egbuwalo through his counsel, Chief Adeniyi Akintola, SAN, sought the interpretation of the section
Section 137(3) of the 1999 Constitution regarding the qualifications of Governor Aiyedatiwa to contest for a second term in office.
The suit filed by Egbuwalo has the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the Attorney General, and the Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, Governor Aiyedatiwa, the APC, and the Deputy Governor, Dr. Adelami, as defendants.
Justice Adegoke had initially fixed January 28 to decide whether Aiyedatiwa is qualified to re-contest having been sworn in twice as governor of the state.
The defendants however arrested the judgement until the Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja gave a leeway for the delivery.
In her verdict, Justice Adegoke held that the processes of the third to fifth defendants were deemed abandoned having failed to participate during the hearing of the suit, and that it is the only process of the plaintiff, first and second defendants that would be considered.
Consequently, the court dismissed the objection of the first defendant. The court held that the suit was not speculative and academic as argued by the first and second defendants but disclosed a cause of action.
Justice Adegoke further held that “If the third defendant is allowed to contest and serve another four years that will be against the position of the law in Marwa v. Nyako where the Supreme Court held that a President or Governor cannot serve beyond eight years.”
According to her, held that anytime the court is asked to interpret a section of the Constitution, the court has natural jurisdiction to hear and determine such a suit because the court itself is a creation of law and meant to uphold the same at all times.
The court said it found merit in the case of the plaintiff and consequently granted all the reliefs sought.
