By Obinna Uballa
The Federal High Court sitting in Akure, Ondo State, on Thursday ruled that Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa is ineligible to contest for another term in 2028.
The suit was filed by Akin Egbuwalo, a chieftain of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the state, who sought judicial interpretation of Section 137(3) of the Constitution regarding the eligibility of Aiyedatiwa and his deputy, Olayide Adelami, to run for another term.
Named as defendants in the suit were the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Aiyedatiwa, Adelami, and the APC.
Delivering judgment, Justice Toyin Adegoke held that Aiyedatiwa, having been sworn in on December 27, 2023, to complete the tenure of the late Governor Rotimi Akeredolu, and later inaugurated on February 24, 2025, after winning the November 16, 2024, governorship election, cannot legally contest for another term.
The court cited the 1999 Constitution (as amended), which, according to Justice Adegoke, does not permit an elected president, vice-president, governor, or deputy governor to serve more than eight years in office. The ruling relied on the Supreme Court decision in Marwa v. Nyako.
The judge emphasized that the suit was neither speculative nor academic, affirming the court’s inherent jurisdiction to interpret constitutional provisions. He also noted that submissions filed by the third to fifth defendants were considered abandoned, as they did not participate in the proceedings.
Justice Adegoke ruled, “If the third defendant is allowed to contest and serve another four years, that will contravene the Supreme Court’s position in Marwa v. Nyako, where it was held that a president or governor cannot serve beyond eight years.” The court subsequently granted all reliefs sought by the plaintiff.
Earlier, the Court of Appeal in Abuja had dismissed Aiyedatiwa’s appeal challenging an earlier Akure Federal High Court ruling that questioned his eligibility to run in the next governorship election.
In a unanimous judgment, Justice Uchechukwu Onyemenam, delivering the lead judgment for a three-member panel, held that the trial court correctly allowed the plaintiff to amend his originating summons and that Aiyedatiwa failed to prove that the amendment caused any miscarriage of justice or denied him a fair hearing.
