Oladele Ogunsakin & Anor. V. Rotimi Samuel Ajidara & Ors. (2007)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

MUHAMMAD SAIFULLAHI MUNTAKA-COOMASSIE, J.C.A.

The appellants herein filed an election petition before the Ekiti State Governorship and Legislative Houses Election Tribunal challenging the election of the 1st Respondent, Rotimi Samuel Ajidara, as a member of the Ekiti House of Assembly representing Ekiti East/constituency and claimed in their petition against the respondents as follows:-

“WHERE OF YOUR PETITIONER PRAY AS FOLLOWS:-

(1) AN ORDER OF THIS HONOURABLE TRIBUNAL DECLARING THAT AT THE TIME OF THE ELECTION, the 1st Respondent was not qualified to contest for the Ekiti State House of Assembly Election having not attained the age of thirty (30) years as at the 14th of April, 2007.

(2) AN ORDER directing the 1st Petitioner as the winner of the House of Assembly Election in Ekiti East Constituency I having scored the second highest number of lawful votes cast in the House of Assembly Election held on the 14th of April, 2007.

(3) AN ORDER directing the 3rd and 4th Respondent to issue a Certificate of return to the 1st Petitioner as the duly elected member of the Ekiti State House of Assembly from Ekiti East Constituency 1 in the April 14th 2007 Election.”

At the foot of the petition, the name and address of the solicitor to the petition were stated thus:-

FOR – ADEBAYO ADENIPEKUN (SAN)

CHIEF AFE BABALOLA SAN & CO.

(PETITIONER’S COUNSEL) C/O CHIEF DAYO FAJUYI & CO.

BESIDE OKESA POLICE STATION ADO-EKITI

Upon the receipt of the Petition, the 1st respondent filed a notice of preliminary objection, wherein he prayed as follows:-

1. “AN ORDER of this Honourable Tribunal striking out the petition of the petitioners for lack of jurisdiction
2. AN ORDER of this Honourable Tribunal striking out the petition of the petitioners for being incompetent.
3. AND (sic) FOR SUCH FURTHER OR ORDER as this court may deem fit to make in the circumstances of this petition.”

The grounds upon which the preliminary objection was based were two folds i.e

(a) The service of the petition was bad and in-effectual; and