Aiyedatiwa eligibility for re-election – The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja has dismissed an appeal filed by Ondo State Governor, Lucky Aiyedatiwa, over a lawsuit challenging his eligibility to contest another term in office. The ruling represents a significant development in an ongoing legal dispute that could shape the political future of Ondo State.
In a unanimous judgment delivered by a three-member panel of justices, the appellate court ruled that the appeal lacked merit. As a result, the court upheld the earlier decision of the Federal High Court in Akure which allowed an amendment to the suit filed against the governor.
The Court of Appeal stated clearly that the trial judge acted within her powers when she permitted the plaintiff to amend the originating summons. Therefore, the appellate court concluded that the governor failed to prove that the lower court violated his constitutional right to fair hearing.
Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal and awarded a cost of N2 million against Governor Aiyedatiwa.
Aiyedatiwa eligibility for re-election: How The Legal Battle Began
The legal dispute started in July 2025 when an All Progressives Congress (APC) chieftain, Dr. Akindele Egbuwalo, filed a lawsuit at the Federal High Court in Akure. In the suit, he asked the court to interpret certain sections of the Nigerian Constitution regarding the eligibility of Governor Aiyedatiwa to contest another governorship election.
Specifically, the plaintiff asked the court to determine whether the governor could legally seek another term after the circumstances under which he first assumed office.
The issue quickly attracted public attention because it touches on constitutional provisions governing the tenure of elected executives in Nigeria.
According to the plaintiff, the constitution places limits on how many times a person can be sworn in as governor under certain conditions. Therefore, the court needed to clarify whether those limits apply to the Ondo State governor.
SEE ALSO,
Aiyedatiwa eligibility for re-election: Events That Led To The Controversy
The controversy surrounding the case stems from the political events that unfolded in Ondo State after the death of former governor Rotimi Akeredolu.
Governor Aiyedatiwa first assumed office as governor on December 27, 2024. At the time, he served as deputy governor. However, the constitution required him to take over leadership of the state following the death of Akeredolu.
As a result, he completed the remaining portion of the late governor’s tenure.
Afterward, the political situation in the state changed again. Aiyedatiwa contested the governorship election conducted in Ondo State. He eventually won the election and took the oath of office again on February 24, 2025.
Because of this sequence of events, the governor has taken the oath of office twice within a short period. Therefore, the plaintiff believes the court must determine how the constitution applies to such a situation.
Aiyedatiwa eligibility for re-election: Constitutional Questions Raised
The case focuses mainly on the interpretation of Sections 137(3) and 182(3) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).
These sections deal with circumstances in which a person assumes the office of president or governor after completing the tenure of another elected official.
According to these provisions, a person who takes the oath of office to complete another official’s tenure may only be elected for one additional term in that office.
Therefore, the plaintiff asked the court to determine whether Aiyedatiwa’s first swearing-in should count as a full term under the constitution.
If the court eventually agrees with that interpretation, the ruling could influence how many times the governor can contest elections in the future.
Proceedings At The Federal High Court
The matter first came before the Federal High Court in Akure where the plaintiff requested permission to amend the originating summons. The amendment aimed to include additional legal arguments and clarify some constitutional questions.
However, the defendants opposed the application.
The defendants in the case include Governor Aiyedatiwa, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the Attorney-General of the Federation, the All Progressives Congress (APC), and the Deputy Governor of Ondo State, Dr. Olayide Adelami.
They argued that the lawsuit was speculative and premature. According to them, the Independent National Electoral Commission had not yet announced the timetable for the next governorship election in Ondo State.
Therefore, they insisted that the court should not entertain questions about eligibility for an election that had not yet been scheduled.
Despite these objections, Justice Toyin Adegoke ruled that the amendment should proceed. The judge explained that allowing the amendment would enable the court to address all legal issues raised in the case.
As a result, the Federal High Court granted the plaintiff’s request.
Why Aiyedatiwa Filed An Appeal
Governor Aiyedatiwa later challenged the ruling at the Court of Appeal. He asked the appellate court to overturn the decision of the Federal High Court.
His legal team argued that the trial judge made an error by allowing the amendment.
They also claimed that the amendment introduced new legal issues into the case. Therefore, they urged the Court of Appeal to set aside the ruling and dismiss the amended suit.
However, the appellate court did not agree with those arguments.
After reviewing the submissions of both parties, the court ruled that the trial judge exercised her discretion properly.
The Court of Appeal further explained that courts often allow amendments when they help clarify legal issues. In addition, the justices noted that such amendments promote fair hearing because they enable courts to determine cases based on their merits.
Therefore, the court concluded that the governor failed to prove that the amendment caused any injustice.
Implications Of The Appeal Court Decision
Although the Court of Appeal dismissed the governor’s appeal, the judgment did not determine the main constitutional question raised in the case.
Instead, the ruling simply allows the substantive case to continue at the Federal High Court.
As a result, the trial court will now examine the constitutional provisions in detail before delivering a final judgment.
Legal analysts believe the case could have far-reaching implications for Nigeria’s constitutional law.
For instance, the judgment could clarify how the constitution treats governors who assume office after the death or resignation of another governor.
Furthermore, the case may establish an important legal precedent for similar situations in other states.
Growing Political Interest In Ondo State
Meanwhile, the ruling has generated strong interest among political observers and residents of Ondo State.
Supporters of the governor remain confident that the courts will eventually interpret the constitution in his favour.
However, critics insist that the judiciary must carefully examine the constitutional provisions in order to protect democratic principles.
Consequently, the legal battle continues to attract national attention.
Many analysts believe the outcome could influence political strategies ahead of future elections in the state.
What Happens Next In The Case
Following the dismissal of the appeal, the Federal High Court in Akure will now resume hearing the substantive suit challenging the governor’s eligibility.
The court will consider arguments from both the plaintiff and the defendants before delivering a final judgment.
However, the legal process may not end there. Either party may still appeal the decision depending on the outcome of the trial.
Eventually, the case could reach the Supreme Court, which would then provide a final interpretation of the constitutional provisions involved.
Until then, the legal dispute remains one of the most closely watched political cases in Ondo State.
Meanwhile, political observers, legal experts, and citizens will continue to follow developments closely as the courts determine how the Nigerian Constitution applies to the unique circumstances surrounding Governor Aiyedatiwa’s tenure.
Source: Vanguard
Leave a Reply