The ongoing legal battle over the outcome of the June 20, 2026, Ekiti State governorship election has taken a new twist. Counsel to the Social Democratic Party (SDP), Ebenezer Akinbuli, boycotted the resumed sitting of the Ekiti State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, citing security concerns arising from previous appearances. The tribunal is sitting at the High Court Complex, Ado-Ekiti, the state capital. Akinbuli sent a letter to the court seeking an adjournment of the hearing pending the appellate court’s address on his application for the relocation of further hearings.
The tribunal had adjourned proceedings from 16 to 23 September to enable the Court of Appeal President to consider the petitioners’ request for a change of venue. This request was made following an alleged assault on SDP counsel. However, during the proceedings, the chairman of the three-person tribunal, Abubakar Kutigi, a judge, informed the court that the President of the Court of Appeal, Monica Dongban-Mensem, had declined to order the transfer of the sitting. The tribunal was properly constituted to continue hearing the petitions, Kutigi added.
The counsel to the All Progressives Congress (APC), Kabir Akingbolu, and that of the Independent National Electoral Committee (INEC), Bunmi Ipinlaiye, denied awareness of the order of the Court of Appeal, which was served through the secretary of the tribunal. However, Kutigi adjourned the case to 24 September for the continuation of the hearing to clear all doubts. The SDP and the Action Alliance (AA) had filed petitions challenging the outcome of the governorship election.
Speaking with journalists after the proceedings, the APC counsel, Mr Akingbolu, said the petitioners had renewed their demand for the relocation of the tribunal from Ado-Ekiti. He stressed that the relocation request was made in respect of the SDP petition and not that of the Action Alliance (AA). Akingbolu alleged that the petitioners were responsible for seeking the latest adjournment, saying the request was contained in letters filed in respect of the two election petitions.
Akingbolu described the petition challenging Governor Biodun Oyebanji’s victory as unusual, arguing that the margin and voting pattern in the election made the case unprecedented. He claimed that the governor won in all 16 local government areas and most of the 177 wards in the state. Akingbolu questioned the basis for the petitioners’ challenge to the election, saying the petitioners recorded relatively low vote figures.
The APC counsel further alleged that the petitioners were resorting to various tactics to delay the proceedings, including seeking repeated adjournments. He urged them to focus on the substantive issues before the tribunal. According to Akingbolu, there is confusion, and the court needs to clarify it. The SDP and the AA filed petitions, and on the last adjourned day, 16 September, counsel to the SDP filed a petition, stating that there was no security and that the tribunal’s venue should be moved to Abuja or elsewhere.
The tribunal’s proceedings will continue on 24 September. The Court of Appeal’s decision not to relocate the tribunal has been met with mixed reactions from the parties involved. The SDP’s petition has been described as unusual due to the low vote figures recorded by the petitioners. The outcome of the tribunal’s proceedings will have significant implications for the future of Ekiti State’s governance.
Key points
- The SDP counsel, Ebenezer Akinbuli, boycotted the tribunal citing security concerns.
- The Court of Appeal President, Monica Dongban-Mensem, declined to order the transfer of the tribunal’s sitting.
- The APC counsel, Kabir Akingbolu, described the SDP’s petition as unusual and alleged that the petitioners were seeking to delay the proceedings.
