Bola Bamigbola chronicles the legal process that resulted in the ousting of Ademola Adeleke as the governor of Osun State by the state election tribunal. The tribunal found that the second respondent did not secure a majority of lawful votes cast in the election. Justice Tetsea Kume, the Chairman of the three-member panel, declared the declaration and return of Adeleke as null and void, stating that he could not be regarded as the duly elected governor of Osun State in the election conducted on July 16, 2022. Justice Kume’s judgment was delivered in Osogbo on Friday, where he declared Mr. Adegboyega Oyetola of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as the winner of the governorship poll.
Oyetola and the APC had approached the tribunal, joining the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Adeleke, and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) in their petition. They sought to have the results of the poll declared null and void, raising two main issues: allegations of forgery and non-compliance with laws and guidelines by INEC during the election. The petitioners requested that the court nullify Adeleke’s victory and declare Oyetola the duly elected governor of the state. During the trial, the petitioners called two witnesses and presented numerous documents, while the respondents—INEC, Adeleke, and the PDP—jointly called three witnesses and submitted several documents as well.
The documentary evidence included INEC regulations and guidelines for the election, the INEC manual for electoral officials, and Forms EC8As, which contained election results for various local government areas. The petitioners’ legal team, led by Mr. Lateef Fagbemi, filed these documents before the panel. Expert witness Dr. Isiaka Olanrewaju testified that he identified irregularities in the declaration of Adeleke as governor-elect after analyzing the result forms and comparing them with data from the Bimodal Voters Accreditation System (BVAS). Under cross-examination by INEC’s counsel, Prof. Paul Ananaba, Dr. Olanrewaju stated that he analyzed results from 749 units across ten local government areas.
Another witness, Mr. Rasak Adeosun, claimed that Adeleke did not attend any university and therefore could not have obtained any certificate. Adeosun, who served as the state collation officer for the APC during the election, reported that there was a lack of compliance with INEC’s manual on election day. INEC’s counsel, Ananaba, presented over 1,000 BVAS machines and a forensic audit report as evidence. A Deputy Director in INEC’s ICT department, Abimbola Oladunjoye, testified that there appeared to be over-voting in some polling units mentioned by the petitioners. However, she clarified that over-voting could only be confirmed by comparing figures on Form EC8 series with physical data from the BVAS machines.
Samuel Oduntan, a forensic examiner, also testified that he found over-voting in about six units after inspecting the BVAS machines and comparing the data with Form EC8 series. Rev. Bunmi Jenyo, a personal assistant to Adeleke, presented Adeleke’s certificates and confirmed his attendance at the governor’s graduation in the United States. Justice Kume criticized INEC’s handling of the election, describing its actions as an afterthought and emphasizing that the claim of incomplete synchronization of data could not excuse the commission’s failures.
A minority judgment by Justice A. Ogbuli dismissed Oyetola’s petition, arguing that the two BVAS reports issued by INEC were products of controversy. Ogbuli maintained that the physical data extracted from the BVAS machines represented the actual figures generated on election day. The decision to remove Adeleke came at a time when his administration was still settling into office. Adeleke had gained popularity in the political scene after being elected Senator in 2017, where he was known as the “dancing senator.” His campaign for the July 16 election was marked by lively dance performances that resonated with voters.
Following his inauguration, Adeleke pledged to continue dancing if time permitted and promised to implement transformative initiatives within his first 100 days in office. His administration rolled out various programs, including the provision of 332 boreholes across all wards in the state, health interventions, and infrastructural improvements. The court’s decision to remove Adeleke was welcomed by some APC members, who viewed it as a fulfillment of Oyetola’s prediction of returning to office. However, many PDP members recalled Oyetola’s previous loss at the tribunal in 2019, which he later overturned in the Appeal Court and the Supreme Court.
In the aftermath of the tribunal’s verdict, many residents stayed indoors out of fear as hoodlums took to the streets in protest. Areas such as Otaefun, Igbona, and Ogo-Oluwa experienced unrest, with hoodlums blocking roads and attacking commercial motorcyclists. Business activities were disrupted, and many markets closed due to the violence. The APC leadership condemned the actions of the political hoodlums, stating that they had attacked APC members and destroyed campaign materials following the judgment.
Adeleke, in a state-wide broadcast, rejected the tribunal’s judgment and announced his intention to appeal to a higher court. He urged the people of Osun State to remain calm and law-abiding, asserting that the reality of his election was reflected in the dissenting judgment of the tribunal. Meanwhile, a former member of Oyetola’s government expressed concerns about the violence and indicated that the APC leadership might call for a state of emergency if the situation did not improve.
In response, the acting chairman of the Osun PDP, Akindele Adekunle, dismissed the claims of violence as unfounded and accused the former commissioner of being an alarmist. He asserted that PDP members were peacefully protesting against what they perceived as an attempt to undermine Adeleke’s mandate. Adekunle criticized the tribunal’s judgment, particularly the reference to the “Buga” song, arguing that it trivialized a serious matter and reflected a lack of seriousness in the judicial process. He contended that the judgment would not withstand scrutiny in a higher court, emphasizing that personal conduct, such as dancing, should not be a basis for legal judgment.
Comments are closed for this story.