The legal dispute over the PDP governorship primary in Ekiti State reached a crucial stage in court yesterday, as the aspirants fiercely contested the legitimacy of various delegate lists critical to the case’s determination.
From the outset, Justice Kuewumi asserted judicial control, making it unequivocally clear that, given the strict timelines governing pre-election matters, the case must proceed immediately to substantive hearing.
This was reinforced by a swift bench ruling that overruled the objection raised by the counsel representing Dr. Wole Oluyede, who had sought to stall proceedings based on an alleged right of reply to the 3rd Defendant’s counter-affidavits.
This firm disposition immediately accelerated the proceedings, with the court later curtailing an attempt by Oluyede’s lawyer, Olanipekun SAN, to introduce arguments outside of their written adoption processes.
During the submissions, the court heard conflicting positions. The PDP and the Chairman for the primary, aligning themselves with Dr. Oluyede, argued in support of the official result and urged the court to recognize the primary as valid.
Conversely, and much to the surprise of many present, counsel for Barrister Rita urged the court to nullify the entire primary, asserting it was a process unknown to law.
Speaking on behalf of Prince (Dr.) Funso Ayeni, Barrister Kolapo Kolade SAN highlighted the core of his client’s challenge: the delegate list supplied to Ayeni’s campaign prior to the election was substantially different from the list ultimately utilized during the primary, a discrepancy that forms the basis of his claim of fundamental manipulation.
Introducing a layer of complexity, counsel to Mrs. Funmi Ogun, Ahmad B. Eleburuike, Esq., confirmed the widespread fraud but presented a stern and partially dissenting view. He asserted that both the delegate list championed as “genuine” by Ayeni’s counsel and the list relied upon to declare Dr. Oluyede the winner were illegitimate. Mr. Eleburuike demonstrated factual evidence showing how illegal names had been injected into both lists when compared against the sole legitimate list that originated from the ad-hoc congress sanctioned by INEC, thereby strengthening the argument that the primary was comprehensively compromised.
However, the counsel for Ogun also argued that Dr. Ayeni’s nomination form failed “to comply with PDP guidelines, specifically lacking the required signature of a ward member, and urged the court to disqualify Ayeni from participating in any eventual re-run primary.”
The counsel clarified that “0the only genuine list of delegates is the one sanctioned by INEC”, against which none of the parties on record had registered an objection; the court subsequently ordered Ogun’s counsel to clarify these submissions for proper recording.
Throughout the entire session, Justice Kuewumi consistently emphasized that “the court would rely solely on the documented evidence presented by the parties, pointedly reminding everyone that “the court is not a Father Christmas hall,” thereby underscoring that judgment would be based on facts, not sentiment or political maneuvering. With the internal inconsistencies thoroughly exposed and the credibility of the primary now under serious judicial scrutiny, the case has been adjourned to January 13th for continuation.
This decisive session marks another procedural setback for both Oluyede and Funsho Ayeni, the main parties seeking relief from the court.