Appeal Court halts judgment on Aiyedatiwa’s eligibility to recontest as Ondo governor

The Federal High Court sitting in Akure will no longer proceed with its judgment on the suit challenging the eligibility of Ondo State Governor, Lucky Aiyedatiwa, to contest for a second term when his tenure expires in 2028.

This is because the Court of Appeal sitting in Akure has ordered the lower court to halt its judgment schedule for tomorrow

The appellate court also stayed further proceedings in the suit filed by an All Progressives Congress (APC) chieftain, Dr. Akin Egbuwalo, which seeks an interpretation of Section 137(3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) regarding Governor Aiyedatiwa’s qualification to seek re-election.

Justice Toyin Bolaji Adegoke of the Federal High Court, Akure, had fixed January 28 to determine whether Aiyedatiwa is eligible to contest again, having been sworn in twice as governor.

Join New Telegraph WhatsApp ChanlAiyedatiwa was first sworn in on December 27, 2024, to complete the tenure of the late Governor Oluwarotimi Akeredolu.

He was sworn in again on February 24, 2025, after defeating Agboola Ajayi of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the November 16, 2024, governorship election.

The suit, filed by Egbuwalo through his counsel, Chief Adeniyi Akintola, SAN, listed the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Governor Aiyedatiwa, the All Progressives Congress (APC), and the Deputy Governor, Dr. Olayide Adelami, as defendants.

However, the defendants, through their counsel led by Chief Solomon Awomolo, SAN, filed a petition challenging the conduct of the trial court and urged the Court of Appeal to restrain Justice Adegoke from delivering judgment pending the determination of interlocutory appeals before the appellate court.

Although Akintola, SAN, urged the court to discountenance the arguments of the defendants on the grounds that no valid appeal was before the court, the panel led by Justice P. O. Affen held that it was in the interest of justice to allow the trial judge respond to the serious allegations made against him.

Other members of the panel were Justices M. S. Hassan and P. C. Obiorah.

The justices noted that while it is not the usual practice to arrest the judgment of a lower court or suspend proceedings, exceptions exist where circumstances demand such intervention.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal suspended the delivery of judgment by the Federal High Court scheduled for January 28, pending the determination of the appeal before it.

Reacting to the ruling, Awomolo, SAN, said the implication was that the trial court must halt proceedings until further notice.