Court Dismisses Suit Challenging Aiyedatiwa, Deputy’s Qualifications

A suit challenging the qualifications of Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa and his Deputy, Olaiyide Adelami, for the November 16, 2024 governorship election in Ondo State has been dismissed by the Federal High Court sitting in Akure, the state capital.

The New Nigeria People’s Party (NNPP) candidate in the election, Olugbenga Edema, had sought the court’s order to compel the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to withdraw the nomination and the publication of the names of Aiyedatiwa of the All Progressives Congress (APC) and his deputy as candidates.

Edema in the suit asked the court to interpret the applicability of Section 15 of the Third Schedule to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) over the nomination of the APC candidates.

While Edema and NNPP were plaintiffs in the suit, Aiyedatiwa, Adelami, INEC, and All Progressives Congress (APC) were defendants.

The NNPP asked the court to strike out its name from the list of plaintiffs during the pendency of the suit, and the court granted it.

The court presided over by Justice Toyin Bolaji Adegoke on Monday dismissed the suit.

The judge said in her judgment that the NNPP candidate failed to obey the earlier order of the court and adjust his pleadings before the court.

The counsel to the plaintiff, Soladoye Ekundayo, said he had filed an appeal against the ruling of the court that struck out the name of NNPP from the suit.

He told the court to grant adjournment for the plaintiff to amend his pleadings.

But counsel to Aiyedatiwa, Adelami, INEC, and APC, Charles Edosanwon, Banjo Aiyenakin, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, and Remi Olatubora, asked the court to dismiss the suit for want of diligent prosecution.

Edosomwan, who led the defendants, said the order at the last adjourned date was for the parties to make consequential adjustments to their pleas, having struck out the name of the first plaintiff from the suit.

Edosomwan said the fact that an appeal has been filed is not a stay of proceeding.

He said the plaintiff had not made any application before the court and asked the court to dismiss the case.

He said the case must end so that the parties can take all the issues to the Court of Appeal.

Aiyenakin, who aligned himself with the position of Edosomwan, said the failure of the plaintiff to amend his pleadings was tantamount to disobedience of the lawful order of the court.

He said the case is deemed to have been abandoned.

Olatubora also adopted the submission of the defendants. He said his client has joined issues with the plaintiffs through the counter-affidavit.

He said parties have filed their pleadings and led evidence. He added that the court has got to the point of no return in law.

Similarly, Adegboruwa said that the adjustment the court ordered was supposed to have come by February 18, and up until March 10, the plaintiff has not complied with the order of the court.

Adegboruwa made a case for the dismissal of the plaintiff’s case for want of diligent prosecution and for not complying with the order of the court. He added that the appeal is an interlocutory and cannot stop the hearing of the substantive suit.

In her verdict, Justice Adegoke said that mere notice of appeal does not operate as a stay of proceeding.

She said there is no affidavit to support the claim of the pending appeal.

New Telegraph in your inbox
Subscribe to our newsletter to receive the latest news updates instantly!

Justice Adegoke said the plaintiff’s disregard for the order of the court was an indication of self-help.

She said failure to adjust the pleadings had a great impact on the suit and consequently dismissed the suit.

She added that the plaintiff did not deserve adjournment. She dismissed the case with #100.000 to each of the defendants.