An Ekiti State High Court in Ado-Ekiti on Wednesday granted an order stopping the conduct of the Local Government and state congresses of Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the state.
Justice E.B. Omotoso gave the order while ruling on a motion on exparte number HAD/424M/2025 filed by Afolabi Adedeji.
The suit was filed against the PDP, the party’s Acting National Chairman, Umar Damagun; National Organising Secretary, Umar Bature; Caretaker Chairman of the party in Ekiti state, Dare Adeleke and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
The court ordered that all parties to the suit should maintain status quo, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.
The court also ordered that the PDP Acting National Chairman, National Organising Secretary and Ekiti State Caretaker Chairman should be served the court order through their WhatsApp numbers.
The court ruled, “Leave is hereby granted to the claimant/applicant to serve the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants the Originating Process with its accompanying processes by substituted means, by pasting the aforesaid originating process on the wall of the 1st defendant’s office situate at Ajilosun Street, Ado Ekiti, Ekiti State. In addition, the claimant/applicant is granted leave to serve the 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants vide their WhatsApp phone numbers 08047677070, 08035961850 and 08033242822 respectively. All parties in this case are hereby ordered to maintain status quo pending the hearing and determination of the Motion on Notice which is hereby fixed for hearing on Wednesday, the 14th day of May 2025.’’.
The plaintiff, Afolabi Adedeji, had sought an order of interim injunction, retraining the defendants, privies, agents and successor-in-title/office, from accepting any list of persons who did not obtain election forms, participate in the elections and elected by the simple majority votes of the ward congress of the PDP in Ekiti State to act for the party, as delegates at any election of the party apart from those elected on March 15, 2025.
The plaintiff also sought an order of the court to mark the originating summons as concurrent.
He equally sought to issue and serve, the originating summons, and other accompanying originating processes, and all other processes in the case of the 1st , 2nd, 3rd and 5th defendants, whose address is outside the jurisdiction of the court and in the Federal Capital Territory.
