The Ondo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, sitting in Akure, the state capital, on Wednesday, delivered a unanimous verdict affirming the election of Hon. Lucky Aiyedatiwa of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as the duly elected Governor of Ondo State.
The panel dismissed all petitions challenging the validity of the November 16, 2024, gubernatorial election, reaffirming the mandate given to Aiyedatiwa and his deputy, Dr. Olayide Adelami, by the electorate.
The three-member panel—comprising Justice Imelda Etiape, Justice Daurabu Sikkam, and led by Justice Benson Ogubu—declared that the various petitions filed before the tribunal lacked merit and were devoid of substance.
The court, in its ruling, held that the petitioners failed to provide convincing evidence to support their claims, thus rendering their cases unworthy of further judicial consideration.
One of the major petitions had been filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate, Hon. Agboola Ajayi, who contested the eligibility of the Deputy Governor, Dr. Adelami.
The petitioners alleged that Adelami forged his West African Examinations Council (WAEC) certificate, submitting conflicting names across three different documents. The PDP argued that since the APC was the platform on which both Aiyedatiwa and Adelami contested, the alleged forgery should nullify the entire ticket.
However, the Tribunal ruled that the issue of qualification—especially the certificate forgery allegation—was a pre-election matter already resolved by the Federal High Court, the Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court.
It stated that the election tribunal had no jurisdiction to reopen a case already conclusively decided by superior courts, noting that both parties were bound by those rulings. Accordingly, all related paragraphs in the PDP’s petition were struck out.
The PDP also called for the annulment of the election on the basis that it was conducted in breach of Section 73(2) of the Electoral Act, 2022. According to their argument, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) failed to record critical details such as the quantity and serial numbers of result sheets, ballot papers, and other sensitive electoral materials in Form EC25B. They claimed this violation occurred in 3,834 polling units—representing about 97 percent of all 3,933 polling units in the state.
The Tribunal, however, ruled that Form EC25B did not require the recording of serial numbers, as claimed by the petitioners. The judges clarified that what was essential under the law was the documentation of the quantity of materials used, not their serial numbers. It also noted that the petitioners neither identified nor demonstrated the alleged discrepancies through credible and admissible evidence.
On the issue of over-voting, the Tribunal ruled that the PDP failed to substantiate its claims. It observed that none of the petitioner’s witnesses presented certified data from the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) to support their allegations. As a result, the claim of over-voting was dismissed for lacking proof.
Similarly, the Tribunal dismissed petitions filed by other political parties, including the Action Alliance (AA), Allied Peoples Movement (APM), and the Social Democratic Party (SDP). These parties were found to lack the legal standing (locus standi) to challenge the election results, as they failed to field any valid candidates in the election.
The APM’s petition, in particular, was ruled as lacking in material facts and credible evidence. Justice Ogubu, delivering the lead judgment, stated that the APM’s allegations—including those of voting without accreditation, over-voting, electoral fraud, and substantial non-compliance with the Electoral Act—were not supported by verifiable information. He further noted that the written statements of the party’s witnesses held no evidential value as they failed to disclose the sources of their claims.
In the case of the SDP, the party—represented by its counsel Prince Adewole Adebayo—alleged irregularities in vote entries on Form EC8A, alongside claims of over-voting and Electoral Act violations. However, Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, counsel to the respondents, urged the Tribunal to dismiss the petition on grounds of insubstantiality.
The Tribunal agreed, stating that the claims were speculative and unaccompanied by credible evidence. It emphasized that judicial reliefs cannot be granted on the basis of hearsay, conjecture, or political rhetoric.
Following the Tribunal’s verdict, Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa expressed gratitude to the people of Ondo State for entrusting him with their mandate. He described the judgment as a reaffirmation of the will of the electorate expressed on November 16, 2024.
“I thank the good people of Ondo State for believing in us. Over 366,000 residents gave us this mandate last November, and today, that mandate has been reaffirmed by the Tribunal. I am grateful to God for guiding this journey from the beginning,” Aiyedatiwa said.
He further acknowledged his deputy, the APC leadership, and the party’s members, expressing appreciation for their support throughout the electoral and legal process. Extending an olive branch, he invited the opposition to join his administration in moving the state forward, saying, “If their intention is to contribute to the development of our state, we are open to ideas and collaboration.”
In response to the ruling, PDP counsel Barrister Olujimi Oluseye stated that while the party respects the judgment and the panel, the outcome did not favour their clients. He confirmed that the party would obtain the Certified True Copy of the Tribunal’s judgment for thorough review.
“Our clients have the constitutional right to appeal the decision. Once we examine the full text of the ruling, we will decide on the next course of action, which may include approaching the Court of Appeal,” Oluseye said.