There was mild drama today as two lawyers had verbal altercations at Federal High Court sitting in Akure, Ondo State, over legal representation of New Nigeria People’s Party(NNPP) in a case challenging the qualification of Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa for the November 16, 2024 gubernatorial election in Ondo State.
The lawyers involved in the altercations are Adelanke Akinrata and Abayomi Ojo, reports Daily Independent.
It would be recalled that Akinrata was part of the legal team that represented Aiyedatiwa in the suit filed by Hon Olugbenga Edema which came up for hearing on December 11.
Today, Akinrata announced his appearance as counsel to the NNPP, a development which was described as a diatribe among lawyers in the court.
Consequently, Ojo told the court that Akinrata could not represent the NNPP because he had earlier appeared for one of the defendants in the same case.
He argued that it would be unethical for a counsel to represent both plaintiffs and defendants in the same suit.
Olugbenga Edema, the governorship candidate candidate of NNPP had in his suit sought the court’s order to compel the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to withdraw the nomination and the publication of the names the governorship candidate of All Progressives Congress(APC) Lucky Aiyedatiwa, and his deputy, Olayide Adelami, as candidates of the party.
Edema also prayed the court to interpret the applicability of Section 15 of the Third Schedule to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) over the nomination of the APC candidates.
It would be recalled that when the case came up for hearing on December 11, 2024, the NNPP, through its National Legal Adviser, Mr. Robert Hon, told the court the party did not authorize any suit against the candidature of Governor Aiyedatiwa and his Deputy, Dr. Olaiyide Adelami, asking for the withdrawal of the party’s name from the suit.
In response to the suit, Aiyedatiwa, Adelami, INEC, and APC, through their attorneys, Dr. Remi Olatubora SAN, Mr. Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa SAN, Chief Charles Edosomwan SAN, who represented INEC, asked the court to dismiss the suit filed by Edema on grounds that it lacked jurisdiction and that the applicant lacked locus standi to file the suit.
Arguing the preliminary objections which came up for hearing on Monday, Akinrata told the court to strike out the name of NNPP, who is the first plaintiff from the suit.
He presented a letter from the Legal Adviser of the party and the affidavit deposed to by the state Chairman of the party to the motion.
Akinrata told the court that he had the authority of NNPP at the state and national levels to withdraw the name of the party from the suit.
On the above grounds, Akinrata, on January 9, 2025, filed an application for withdrawal.
Edosomwan, the attorney of INEC in the suit, confirmed seeing the letter, saying he could not doubt the authenticity of the letter from the NNPP to strike out its name from the suit.
Olatubora said: “The counsel to the second plaintiff should deal with the disownment of suit. It is one risk in our jobs. It is on record that he was served with the motion with Adelanke dated January 9 and filed on 11. The Counsel was aware that the party has said it did not authorize the suit.”
All the counsels to the defendants declared that they would not object to the striking out of NNPP’s name from the suit.
Nevertheless, Ojo insisted that Akinrata had violated rules 3 and 29 of the lawyers’ conduct of the Federal High Court in pre-election matters.
He said the lawyer has also violated rules 14, 15,17, 29, and 30 of the professional conduct of lawyers in trying to appear for both defendants and plaintiffs in the same matter.
In his ruling, the presiding judge, Justice Toyin Bolaji Adegoke, fixed the ruling on whether the lawyer could appear for the NNPP and striking of the name from the substantive suit.
