Adebayo Adenrele
The Federal High Court sitting in Ado-Ekiti has struck out a suit alleging public service rule violation, filed by Bayo Bablotin against the candidate of All Progressives Congress (APC) for the Ekiti South Federal Constituency 1 House of Representatives seat in the forthcoming January 2027 election, Engr. Toyin Okoro.
In his judgment on the suit (Suit No: FHC/AD/CS/19/2026) filed by the plaintiff, Justice Babs Kuewumi ruled that the claimant lacked the locus standi to institute the said suit against Engr. Toyin Okoro, further asserting that it was audacious for Bablotin to attempt to challenge an APC primary in which he was not a participant.
Justice Kuewumi also struck out the name of Ekiti State APC from the suit as the 3rd defendant, with his ruling encompassing both the APC’s Ekiti chapter and its national body.
It would be recalled that the incumbent House of Representatives member and retired Air Vice Marshal, Adeniyi Ojuawo, lost the APC primary election for the Ekiti South Federal Constituency 1 ticket to Toyin Okoro, with 1,842 and 9,798 votes respectively.
The rivalry further intensified when the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) summoned and interrogated Okoro concerning allegations of public service rule violations.
He was specifically accused of operating a private company to secure public contracts while concurrently serving as a senior legislative aide.
Speaking with journalists shortly after the court proceedings, the lead counsel to the defendant, Dr. Femi Ogunlade stated that the court had delivered judgment in favour of his client, dismissing the suit and affirming that only an aspirant can contest the conduct and validity of a primary election.
His words, “The core issue revolves around who possesses the standing to institute an action against a candidate, a principle that aligns with the provisions of Section 25 of the Constitution and the Electoral Act, which stipulate that only an aspirant who participated in the election, not a mere sympathizer or an unconcerned party, can challenge its outcome in court”.
