The three-member tribunal sitting in Ado-Ekiti adjourned the matter until September 23, 2026. The adjournment will allow the President of the Court of Appeal to consider the petitioners’ request for the case to be transferred from Ekiti State to another venue they consider safer.
The request followed an allegation that counsel representing the Social Democratic Party, SDP, Ebenezer Akinbule, was assaulted. The petitioners also alleged that some of their witnesses were being prevented from attending the tribunal proceedings. These claims were presented in an application seeking a change of venue, but the alleged assault has not been independently established by the tribunal.
Counsel representing the All Progressives Congress, APC, and Governor Biodun Oyebanji, Adetunji Osho, SAN, gave a different account of the events surrounding the adjournment. He said the petitioners’ counsel had appeared before the tribunal on Tuesday but was unable to produce witnesses, citing a crisis affecting the proceedings. Osho said the respondents later received a request for another adjournment based on the alleged assault and difficulties involving witnesses.
According to Osho, the petitioners subsequently wrote to the President of the Court of Appeal requesting that the case be transferred from Ado-Ekiti to another venue considered safe. The respondents conceded to the adjournment while waiting for a decision on the venue application.
The election petition concerns the outcome of the June 20, 2026, Ekiti State governorship election. Hearing of the petition began on September 8, with the tribunal expected to continue proceedings on a day-to-day basis within the time allowed for election petitions.
The latest development has therefore temporarily shifted attention from the presentation of evidence to the question of where the tribunal should continue its proceedings. The President of the Court of Appeal is expected to determine whether the petition should remain in Ado-Ekiti or be transferred to another location.
Until that decision is made, the tribunal has scheduled the matter for September 23. The outcome of the venue application could determine where the next stage of the election petition will take place.
The tribunal has not ruled that an assault occurred. The allegation remains part of the petitioners’ application, while the respondents have presented their own account of the events leading to the adjournment.
For now, proceedings remain adjourned as the parties await the decision of the Court of Appeal on the proposed change of venue.
