In a significant development in Nigeria’s judicial and political landscape, the Supreme Court of Nigeria, on Wednesday, September 17, 2025, dismissed two separate appeals challenging the outcome of the 2024 Ondo State governorship election. The apex court’s rulings brought closure to legal disputes initiated by Mr. Bamidele Akingboye, the governorship candidate of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), and the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) along with its governorship candidate. These dismissals reaffirmed the judiciary’s role in upholding electoral integrity while navigating complex legal proceedings.
The decisions, delivered by a five-member panel of justices led by Justice Iyang Okoro, were grounded in procedural withdrawals by the appellants’ legal teams. The cases, which had garnered significant attention in Ondo State and beyond, underscored the challenges of post-election litigation in Nigeria’s democratic process. This article delves into the details of the court’s rulings, the circumstances surrounding the appeals, the broader context of the 2024 Ondo State governorship election, and the implications for Nigeria’s electoral and judicial systems.
Background of the 2024 Ondo State Governorship Election
The Ondo State governorship election, held in 2024, was a pivotal moment in the state’s political history. Ondo State, located in Nigeria’s South-West geopolitical zone, is known for its vibrant political culture and strategic importance in regional politics. The election saw intense competition among candidates from various political parties, including the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the Social Democratic Party (SDP), the Allied Peoples Movement (APM), and other minor parties.
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Nigeria’s electoral body, conducted the election under intense scrutiny, with stakeholders emphasizing the need for transparency, fairness, and adherence to electoral laws. The APC candidate emerged victorious, securing the governorship seat, but the outcome was not without controversy. Allegations of electoral irregularities, including vote-buying, manipulation of results, and procedural lapses, surfaced in the aftermath of the election. These allegations prompted several candidates and their parties to seek judicial redress, challenging the declared results.
Among the challengers were Mr. Bamidele Akingboye of the SDP and the APM’s governorship candidate, whose appeals reached the Supreme Court after progressing through the lower courts. Their cases were emblematic of the broader tensions in Nigeria’s electoral process, where disputes often escalate to the judiciary for resolution.
The Supreme Court’s Rulings
The Supreme Court’s proceedings on Wednesday were marked by brevity and procedural clarity. The two appeals were dismissed following formal applications by the appellants’ legal teams to withdraw their cases. Below is a detailed account of each case and the court’s decision.
The SDP and Bamidele Akingboye’s Appeal
The first appeal was filed by Mr. Bamidele Akingboye, the SDP’s governorship candidate in the 2024 Ondo State election. Akingboye had challenged the outcome of the election, alleging that the process was marred by irregularities that undermined the will of the electorate. His legal team argued that the declared results did not reflect the true outcome of the election and sought to have the results nullified or a rerun ordered.
However, a significant development altered the course of the appeal. Prior to the Supreme Court hearing, Mr. Akingboye passed away, creating an unprecedented situation in the litigation process. His counsel, in a formal application to the court, requested the withdrawal of the appeal due to the appellant’s death. The counsel’s decision was informed by legal principles, as the death of a principal party in a case often renders the matter academic or incapable of further prosecution, particularly in election-related disputes where the candidate’s personal stake is central.
Counsel representing the respondents, including INEC and the declared winner, raised no objection to the withdrawal application. The absence of opposition streamlined the court’s decision-making process. The five-member panel, led by Justice Iyang Okoro, considered the application and struck out the appeal. The ruling was a procedural necessity, as the court could not proceed with a case where the primary appellant was deceased, and no substituted party was proposed to continue the litigation.
The dismissal of Akingboye’s appeal was a somber moment in the courtroom, as it highlighted the fragility of life and the unpredictability of legal proceedings. Beyond the procedural outcome, the case raised questions about the SDP’s strategy in the election and its future in Ondo State politics, particularly in light of the loss of a key figure.
The APM’s Appeal
The second appeal was filed by the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) and its governorship candidate, whose identity was not specified in the original report. Like the SDP, the APM had challenged the election results, citing alleged breaches of electoral laws and irregularities in the conduct of the poll. The party’s legal team argued that the APC’s victory was tainted by procedural flaws and sought judicial intervention to overturn the outcome.
However, during the Supreme Court hearing, the APM’s counsel made a formal application to withdraw the appeal. The reasons for the withdrawal were not explicitly stated in the court proceedings, but such decisions are often influenced by strategic considerations, including the strength of the case, the likelihood of success, or external factors such as political negotiations or settlements. The respondents’ counsel, representing INEC and other parties, did not oppose the application.
The Supreme Court panel, under Justice Okoro’s leadership, reviewed the application and dismissed the appeal accordingly. The dismissal marked the end of the APM’s legal challenge, effectively upholding the results of the 2024 Ondo State governorship election as declared by INEC.
Legal and Procedural Context
The Supreme Court’s decisions in these cases reflect established principles of Nigerian electoral law and judicial practice. Election petitions in Nigeria follow a structured legal framework, beginning with the Election Tribunal, progressing to the Court of Appeal, and culminating at the Supreme Court for governorship and presidential elections. The burden of proof lies heavily on petitioners, who must provide substantial evidence to substantiate claims of electoral malpractice or non-compliance with the Electoral Act.
In both the SDP and APM cases, the appeals reached the Supreme Court after navigating the lower courts, where the petitioners likely faced challenges in meeting the evidentiary threshold required to overturn the election results. The withdrawal of the appeals before a substantive hearing suggests that the legal teams may have reassessed their chances of success or encountered insurmountable obstacles, such as the death of the SDP candidate or strategic considerations for the APM.
The Supreme Court’s role as the final arbiter in election disputes is critical to Nigeria’s democracy. Its decisions not only resolve individual cases but also set precedents that shape the conduct of future elections. By dismissing the appeals, the court reaffirmed the finality of the electoral process in Ondo State, signaling that only compelling evidence and robust legal arguments can overturn INEC’s declarations.
Implications for Ondo State and Nigerian Politics
The dismissal of the appeals has far-reaching implications for Ondo State’s political landscape and Nigeria’s broader democratic process. Below are some key implications:
Consolidation of APC’s Dominance: The APC’s victory in the 2024 Ondo State governorship election, now upheld by the Supreme Court, strengthens the party’s grip on the state. Ondo State has historically been a stronghold for progressive politics, and the APC’s continued dominance reinforces its influence in the South-West region. The ruling party will likely leverage this victory to consolidate power and prepare for future elections, including the 2027 general elections.
Impact on Opposition Parties: The SDP and APM, as opposition parties, face significant setbacks following the dismissal of their appeals. For the SDP, the loss of Bamidele Akingboye is a blow to its visibility and organizational strength in Ondo State. The party will need to regroup and identify new leadership to remain competitive. Similarly, the APM’s withdrawal suggests a possible reevaluation of its political strategy, as smaller parties often struggle to challenge the dominance of the APC and PDP in Nigeria’s political space.
Judicial Affirmation of Electoral Processes: The Supreme Court’s rulings underscore the judiciary’s commitment to upholding INEC’s declarations unless clear evidence of malpractice is presented. This stance reinforces public confidence in the electoral process, provided that INEC continues to improve transparency and accountability. However, it also highlights the challenges petitioners face in proving electoral irregularities, which can discourage frivolous litigation but may also deter genuine grievances if the evidentiary bar is perceived as too high.
Lessons for Future Elections: The 2024 Ondo State election and its legal aftermath offer lessons for stakeholders in Nigeria’s electoral system. Political parties must invest in robust monitoring mechanisms to document evidence of irregularities during elections. INEC, on its part, must continue to enhance the credibility of the electoral process through technology, such as the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS), and transparent result collation processes.
Human Element in Electoral Disputes: The death of Bamidele Akingboye serves as a poignant reminder of the human element in political and legal struggles. His passing not only halted the SDP’s legal challenge but also highlighted the personal sacrifices candidates make in pursuit of public office. It underscores the need for political actors to prioritize health and well-being amid the intense pressures of electoral campaigns.
Broader Context: Nigeria’s Electoral Challenges
The Ondo State governorship election and the subsequent legal battles are microcosms of Nigeria’s broader electoral challenges. Since the return to democratic rule in 1999, Nigeria has made significant strides in conducting elections, but issues such as vote-buying, violence, logistical failures, and allegations of rigging persist. The judiciary has played a critical role in resolving disputes, but the volume of election petitions underscores the need for systemic reforms.
One recurring issue is the reliance on the judiciary to settle electoral disputes, which places immense pressure on the courts and can erode public trust if decisions are perceived as biased or politically influenced. The Supreme Court’s dismissal of the Ondo State appeals, while procedurally sound, may fuel debates about access to justice for opposition candidates and the adequacy of legal remedies for electoral grievances.
Moreover, the withdrawal of appeals, as seen in both cases, raises questions about the sustainability of prolonged litigation. Financial and logistical constraints often force petitioners to abandon their cases, particularly when the prospects of success are uncertain. This dynamic can disadvantage smaller parties and candidates with limited resources, reinforcing the dominance of major parties like the APC and PDP.
To address these challenges, stakeholders have proposed several reforms, including:
Strengthening INEC’s Independence: Ensuring that INEC operates free from political interference is critical to reducing post-election disputes. Investments in technology and capacity-building for electoral officials can enhance the credibility of the process.
Electoral Offences Commission: Establishing a dedicated body to prosecute electoral offences, such as vote-buying and violence, could deter malpractices and reduce the burden on the judiciary.
Simplified Legal Processes: Streamlining the legal framework for election petitions could make it easier for genuine grievances to be addressed without undue delays or costs.
Voter Education: Educating voters about their rights and the electoral process can empower citizens to hold candidates and officials accountable, reducing the incidence of irregularities.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s dismissal of the appeals filed by the SDP and APM marks the end of legal challenges to the 2024 Ondo State governorship election. The rulings, driven by procedural withdrawals, highlight the complexities of election litigation in Nigeria and the judiciary’s role in balancing legal principles with practical realities. While the decisions affirm the APC’s victory, they also underscore the challenges faced by opposition parties in navigating Nigeria’s electoral and judicial systems.
The cases of Bamidele Akingboye and the APM reflect broader themes in Nigeria’s democratic journey: the quest for electoral integrity, the burden of proof in legal challenges, and the human toll of political contests. As Ondo State moves forward under its newly elected governor, the lessons from this election and its aftermath will shape the strategies of political actors and the expectations of citizens.
For Nigeria’s democracy to thrive, stakeholders must work collaboratively to address systemic challenges, strengthen electoral institutions, and ensure that the will of the people is accurately reflected in election outcomes. The Supreme Court’s rulings, while closing one chapter, open the door to ongoing conversations about how to build a more transparent, fair, and inclusive electoral system.