Ondo: Beyond Aiyedatiwa’s Quest for Power after 2028

Fidelis David reports that the recent judgement of the Federal High Court in Akure restraining Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa from seeking another term has opened a fresh constitutional and political debate in Ondo State, a state long familiar with complex power struggles and legal battles over tenure.

In politics, ambition often stretches the boundaries of power, but in constitutional democracies, the law ultimately draws the line. That line appears to have been firmly drawn in Ondo State following a recent Federal High Court ruling restraining Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa from seeking another term in office.

Delivering the judgement, Justice Toyin Bolaji Adegoke held that the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria does not permit a governor to remain in office beyond eight years under any circumstance. The court relied heavily on the precedent established by the Marwa v. Nyako decision of the Supreme Court of Nigeria, which settled the constitutional debate over tenure elongation for governors who inherited office.

The legal battle was initiated by a member of the All Progressives Congress, Akin Egbuwalo, who challenged the governor’s eligibility to contest another term in office. Through his counsel, Adeniyi Akintola, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), the plaintiff asked the court to interpret Section 137(3) of the 1999 Constitution as it relates to the qualification of Aiyedatiwa to seek re-election.

Those listed as defendants in the suit included the Independent National Electoral Commission, the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Governor Aiyedatiwa, the APC, and the deputy governor, Olayide Adelami.

Justice Adegoke noted in her judgment that the processes filed by the third to fifth defendants were deemed abandoned because they failed to participate in the hearing of the suit. According to her, only the submissions of the plaintiff and the first and second defendants were considered. The judge subsequently dismissed the objection raised by the first defendant, ruling that the suit was neither speculative nor academic.

She held: “This court finds that the action filed by the plaintiff discloses a valid cause of action and cannot be dismissed as speculative or academic.”

The court also emphasised that it possesses the inherent jurisdiction to interpret provisions of the Constitution whenever such interpretation is sought.

Justice Adegoke added: “Whenever a court is invited to interpret any provision of the Constitution, the court has the inherent jurisdiction to hear and determine such a matter because the court itself is a creation of law and must uphold the Constitution at all times.”

In the said landmark ruling, the Supreme court declared that the tenure of a governor is tied to the constitutional calendar rather than personal circumstances surrounding how the office was assumed.

Justice Adegoke echoed that position, stating that: “If the third defendant is allowed to contest and serve another four years, that will be against the position of the law in Marwa v. Nyako, where the Supreme Court held that a President or Governor cannot serve beyond eight years.”

Historically, Governor Aiyedatiwa’s political journey to power was anything but straightforward. He first assumed office in December 2024 after the death of his principal, Oluwarotimi Akeredolu, whose illness and prolonged absence from office had already triggered months of political tension in the state.

Aiyedatiwa’s elevation from deputy governor to governor was constitutionally automatic, but politically contentious. Many observers described him as an “accidental governor,” a phrase frequently used in Nigerian politics to describe leaders who inherit power through constitutional succession rather than electoral victory.

However, the real political battle began when he later secured the ticket of the All Progressives Congress for the 2024 governorship election. The primary process that produced him as the party’s candidate was fiercely disputed, with several aspirants alleging irregularities and threatening litigation.

Though the disputes were eventually resolved, the controversies left behind political fault lines that continue to shape the state’s political environment.

No doubt, Nigeria’s political history is replete with court cases defining tenure limits. The precedent cited by the Akure court, Marwa v Nyako, arose when governors in Adamawa, Bayelsa, Kogi and Sokoto argued that their tenure should be extended because earlier elections had been nullified.

The Supreme Court rejected the argument, insisting that constitutional tenure begins from the first oath of office and cannot exceed eight years. The decision effectively ended the possibility of tenure elongation through technical interpretations.

Political analysts note that the Ondo case fits squarely within that legal tradition. “If the logic of the Supreme Court in Marwa v Nyako is applied strictly, the constitutional clock begins from the first oath of office. That is the principle the Federal High Court appears to have relied upon” a constitutional lawyer in Akure observed.

Meanwhile, on his part, Aiyedatiwa has dismissed the ruling as a distraction. In a live television interview, the governor insisted he had never declared any intention to seek another term.

“The truth is that I have never at any time declared to anybody that I am going to contest an election. It is not time for any governorship election in this state. There is no timetable and I have not expressed interest at any time that I am going to run for the office again.”

He further maintained that his focus remains governance rather than political speculation. “I don’t feel any form of distraction. I will continue doing my work for the good people of Ondo State and ensure that I deliver on the promises I made.”

Whether the matter ends at the Federal High Court remains uncertain, as the legal process allows appeals up to the Supreme Court of Nigeria.

However, beyond the courtroom arguments, the controversy reflects deeper political rivalries within the ruling party while several political actors have openly criticised the circumstances surrounding Aiyedatiwa’s emergence.

One of them, Mogbojuri Kayode, co-chairman of Ondo Redemption, argued that the governor’s political rise was controversial from the start. “The present governor accidentally became the governor following the death of Akeredolu. When he completed the tenure of his principal, the party ticket was given to him through the backdoor.”

According to him, earlier legal battles by other aspirants were eventually resolved through political negotiations within the party hierarchy but the grievances never completely disappeared.

Of course, Ondo State has historically experienced intense political rivalries. From the days of the late Adekunle Ajasin and Olusegun Agagu to the turbulent years under Olusegun Mimiko, the state’s politics has often revolved around strong personalities and ideological divisions.

The Aiyedatiwa era appears to be entering a similar phase. Within the APC, internal alignments are already forming ahead of future electoral cycles. Even though the governor has publicly denied any rift with Interior Minister, Hon Olubunmi Tunji-Ojo, many observers believe the contest for political influence in the state is quietly intensifying.

For many observers, the more important question is not whether Aiyedatiwa can run again but how he will use the time he has in office. The governor still has years ahead in his current mandate. Those years, analysts argue, should be devoted to governance rather than speculation about future elections.

Particularly, Ondo State faces significant challenges, including infrastructure deficits, youth unemployment and security concerns in rural communities. Addressing these issues could ultimately define Aiyedatiwa’s political legacy far more than constitutional debates.

Indeed, political strategists often argue that leaders who focus on delivering tangible development are more likely to shape the political future of their states.

Another option open to the governor is to focus on building a strong political structure and grooming a successor. Political succession planning has historically been a powerful tool in Nigerian politics. Leaders who successfully manage succession often maintain long-term influence even after leaving office.

For Aiyedatiwa, nurturing a credible successor within his party could help stabilise the political environment and prevent the intense factional struggles that typically accompany leadership transitions.

The unfolding constitutional debate in Ondo State is therefore more than a legal dispute. It is a test of leadership, political maturity and respect for constitutional boundaries. While the courts will ultimately determine the legal interpretation of tenure limits, the political responsibility lies with those in power.

For Governor Aiyedatiwa, the message from history is clear, political legacies are rarely defined by how long leaders stay in office, but by what they accomplish while they are there. The Sunshine State now watches to see whether the governor will turn the current controversy into an opportunity to focus on governance and shape the future of Ondo politics.