OPINION: E GBÉJÉ FÓRÍ
0
0
0
0
OPINION:
E GBÉJÉ FÓRÍ
By Allen Sowore Esq
E Gbéjé Fórí is a profound Yoruba proverb on fate. The Yoruba language is deeply rich in proverbs, culture, and wisdom. One such powerful saying is “E Gbeje Fori,” which carries a profound message about accepting one’s fate.
This phrase is not just a casual remark; it is a graceful yet compelling way to remind someone to embrace destiny with courage and resignation. It reflects the Yoruba belief in the power of fate (ayanmo), emphasizing that some events in life are beyond human control.
Not many residents of Ondo State are aware that the mandate freely and overwhelmingly given to Governor Lucky Orimisan Aiyedatiwa on November 16, 2024, to steer the ship of the state for the next four years is being challenged by opposition political parties led by the PDP at the Election Tribunal in Akure.
Beyond the unprecedented 18-0 election result, which made history, both local and international observers adjudged the election to be free, fair, and credible. However, in Nigeria’s evolving democratic process, challenging election outcomes in court has increasingly become the third and final phase of the electoral cycle.
Even before the election, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate had already approached the courts, contesting the nomination and eligibility of Olayide Adelami as the Deputy Governorship candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC).
On January 28, 2025, the Court of Appeal, Akure delivered its judgment in Ajayi v. Adelami, a case presided over by a three-member panel:
Hon. Justice O. F. Omoleye
Hon. Justice H. R. Shagari
Hon. Justice Fadare Umar
The court dismissed the appeal filed by Alfred Agboola Ajayi and the PDP, imposing a fine of ₦500,000 in favour of the respondents, jointly and severally. The appellate court also upheld the December 2, 2024 judgment of the trial court.
Before delivering its final ruling, the Court of Appeal scrutinized three key issues raised by the respondents in their preliminary objections:
1. Locus Standi (Right to Sue)
The court examined whether the appellants—Ajayi and the PDP—had the legal standing to institute the case, given that they were not members of the APC. Referring to Section 29(5) of the Electoral Act, 2022, and Section 285(14)(c) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), as well as the Supreme Court’s decision in PDP v. INEC, the court ruled that they lacked locus standi to challenge Adelami’s nomination.
2. Statute of Limitations
The second issue was whether the appellants filed their case within the 14-day statutory timeframe prescribed by Section 285 of the Constitution. The court found that the action was instituted 17 days after the event, exceeding the constitutional limit. Consequently, the court ruled in favour of the respondents.
3. Proper Mode of Commencement & Burden of Proof
The third issue revolved around whether the appellants initiated the suit using the correct legal procedure and whether they met the required burden of proof.
The Evidence Act, 2011 (Section 131(1)) states that “whoever desires any court to give judgment as to any legal right or liability dependent on the existence of facts which he asserts must prove that those facts exist.”
Allegations of a crime (such as forgery or perjury) must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
The appellants filed their case via originating summons, but the rules require that cases involving factual disputes and evidence be commenced by writ of summons.
The Arguments & Court Rulings
Ajayi, represented by Ndoka, SAN, argued that Adelami’s nomination should be nullified due to discrepancies in his name—being referred to as Adelami Owolabi Jackson in one document and Olaide Owolabi Adelami in another. Based on this, Ajayi sought to disqualify both Adelami and the APC’s governorship candidate, claiming that the party had no validly nominated candidates for the 2024 election.
However, Dr. Remi Olatubora, SAN, counsel for Adelami, countered that the name variations were merely differences in order and arrangement, not substantive discrepancies.
The court agreed with the defense, ruling that Ajayi’s claims were insufficient to warrant disqualification.
Judgment of the High Court:
In Suit No. FHC/AK/CS/99/2024, delivered on December 2, 2024, Justice Adegoke ruled that allegations of certificate forgery and perjury were criminal in nature and required evidence from the issuing authorities.
Furthermore, the court emphasized that only APC aspirants who participated in the party’s primary could challenge the nomination of its candidates under Section 29 of the Electoral Act. Since Ajayi and the PDP were not APC aspirants, they had no legal standing to contest Adelami’s candidacy.
As a result, the case was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Given the consistency of judicial rulings on similar cases, the PDP’s legal challenge appears to be a wild goose chase—one that may ultimately reinforce Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa’s victory rather than overturn it.
Whether used to console someone facing difficulties or to encourage acceptance of life’s twists and turns, “E Gbeje Fori” remains a timeless expression of Yoruba philosophy on unchangeable breakthrough.
Allen Sowore, Esq.
SSA to the Governor on Strategic Communication
January 29, 2025
About The Author
