The Federal High Court in Abuja has commenced proceedings on a suit seeking to stop the conduct of the 2026/2027 local government elections in Oyo State.
The suit was filed by Akinloye Olusegun Oyeniyi against the Oyo State Independent Electoral Commission and the Independent National Electoral Commission, listed as the first and second respondents respectively.
At Tuesday’s proceedings, Justice Obiora Egwuatu directed the plaintiff to serve the originating summons on the respondents.
The judge subsequently adjourned the matter until September 10, 2026, for a report on the service of the court processes.
Oyeniyi, through his counsel, Ayo Omoleaupen, is challenging the powers of the Oyo State electoral commission to screen and verify candidates contesting the local government elections.
The plaintiff is asking the court to determine whether the commission’s constitutional responsibility is restricted to the “verification of the documents of nominated candidates” submitted by political parties, rather than the broader “verification/screening of candidates.”
He is also challenging Items 6 and 9 of the commission’s revised timetable and schedule of activities for the 2026/2027 local government elections, arguing that the provisions conflict with the 1999 Constitution and Section 153(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026.
The plaintiff wants the court to declare that the commission lacks the authority to conduct “verification/screening of councillorship and chairmanship candidates” or screen substituted candidates.
Among the reliefs sought is an order restraining INEC from releasing the certified voters’ register for Oyo State to the state electoral commission for use in the local government election until the disputed provisions of the timetable are reviewed or cancelled.
He is also asking the court to strike out or annul the two disputed items in the revised timetable on the grounds that they allegedly contravene the Constitution and the Electoral Act.
Oyeniyi, a businessman and politician from Ogbomoso, said allowing the election to proceed under the disputed arrangements could seriously affect his interests.
In an affidavit filed alongside the originating summons, he argued that granting the application would not cause injustice to the respondents.
He stated, “The Defendants/Respondents will not lose anything by the grant of this application.”
He further maintained that the “balance of convenience” was in his favour, adding that any alleged violation of the Constitution and Electoral Act could not be adequately remedied through monetary compensation.
According to him, granting the reliefs would also “assist in upholding the rule of law and strengthening democracy.”
