Court Dismisses PDP Candidate Ajayi’s Forgery Suit Against APC Candidates in Ondo
A Federal High Court sitting in Akure, the Ondo State capital on Monday dismissed the suit seeking disqualification of the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidates in the November 16 governorship election.
Candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the off-cycle election, Hon. Agboola Ajayi had approached the court to challenge the qualification of the Deputy Governor-elect, Dr Olayide Adelami, citing inconsistency in the names submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
Ajayi who through his lawyer, Mr M. Ndoka SAN, challenged the eligibility of Adelami to contest as the deputy governorship candidate on the platform of APC, consequently sought the disqualification of APC from the ballot.
At the hearing of the matter, no fewer than six Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) were in court to prosecute and defend the case.
In the originating summons through his lawyer, Ndoka, SAN, Ajayi said the first defendant, (Adelami) is known by multiple conflicting and irreconcilable names of Adelami Owolabi Jackson and Olaide Owolabi Adelami.
Based on the conflicting names of the Deputy Governor-elect, Ajayi, who was the second runner-up in the election, asked the court to disqualify Adelami and the governorship candidate.
In his prayers, the PDP’s candidate prayed the court, “That the first defendant, (Adelami) is constitutionally disqualified from contesting the election as Deputy Governorship candidate of APC.”
Also, he sought “A declaration that the APC has no validly nominated Governorship and Deputy Governorship candidate for the 2024 election.”
He further asked for an order disqualifying the defendants from participating in the election and order restraining INEC from publishing their names or allowing them to participate in the election.
But counsel to Adelami, Dr Remi Olatubora, SAN said that the West African Examination Council (WAEC) result has the name Adelami Owolabi Jackson in 1974 and that a degree certificate from Ambrose Alli University issued in 1982 has the name Adelami Olaide Owolabi.
He said the grievance of the plaintiffs is not about discrepancies in the name but the order or arrangements of the names. The position of Olatubora was supported by SANs representing other defendants.
Olatubora said the plaintiffs have no right to file the suit following Section 29(5) of the Electoral Act 2022 because they are not members of the APC and did not participate in the primary that produced Adelami and Aiyedatiwa as candidates.
Olatubora said, “The plaintiffs lack the locus standi to file the suit or seek the reliefs set out in the originating summons. That the suit as a matter of law does not qualify as a pre-election matter, and this court lacks jurisdiction.”
Delivering judgment on Monday, the presiding judge, Justice Toyin Bolaji Adegoke, dismissed all the charges preferred against the APC candidates.
Justice Adegoke, in suit No. FHC/AK/CS/99/2024, held that the PDP candidate who challenged the qualification of the APC’s candidates, Hon Lucky Aiyedatiwa and his running mate, Olaiyide Adelami lacked locus standi to file the suit.
Also, Justice Adegoke held that the case filed by Ajayi and the PDP is barred by statute having filed it outside the 14 days required by the Electoral Act.
Justice Adegoke further held that the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the suit, having filed it through originating summons instead of a Writ of Summons.
The Judge said the issue involving certificate forgery and perjury is criminal, which required the calling of evidence from the authorities that issued the certificates in question.
The court further held that Section 29 of the Electoral Act made provision for who can challenge the candidate of political parties. She said the fact that PDP and Ajayi are not aspirants in the APC primary that produced Aiyedatiwa and Adelami as candidates had rubbed them off any legal right to challenge their qualifications.
The court, consequently, resolved all issues in favour of the defendants, saying the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the case and dismissed it accordingly.
