LGs Crisis: Osun APC Struggle With Reality -By Ibrahim Sarafa

In the light of the recent decision of the Court of Appeal on the contentious issue of who should legally claim leadership of the local governments in the state, I have watched with utter consternation the deliberate attempt to misrepresent the truth about the sack of its YES or NO officials. Contrary to the lies being peddled by the APC, the Court of Appeal decision of February 10, 2025, did not make any pronouncement on the status of the court-sacked officials.

The court merely struck out the originating summon in the suit FHC/OS/CS/94/2022, which was plainly on technicalities. Issues 3 and 4 formulated by the APC, which centred on the question on the October 15, 2022 election and legal status of the beneficiaries of the election, was never entertained by the Court of Appeal as it was discarded as “academic exercise” which the court is not prepared to venture into.

By academic exercise, the Supreme Court in SC/VC/478/2021 held that “a case on appeal become academic when it would bring no benefit to any of the parties, or where there is no live issue in the claim. Also, in AG Plateau State V. AG Federation (2006) 3 NWLR (Pt. 967) 346 @ 419: Nikki Tobi, JSC (of blessed memory stated the law as follows: “A suit is academic where it is merely theoretical, makes empty sound and of no practical value to the plaintiff, even if judgement is given in his favour. A suit is academic if it is not related to practical situation of human nature and humanity.”

The clear implementation of the February 10, 2025 judgement of the Court of Appeal is that, although the suit in the PDP case was struck out, no legal rights was conferred on the court-sacked YES or no officials. It was pure technicality as no judicial pronouncement was made on either the October 15, 2022 local governments election or the purported beneficiaries of the election. The claim of reinstatement is fraudulent and grand scheme to throw Osun state into crisis by the power mongers.

With this reality in clear perspectives, it is important to highlight that the October 15, 2025 local governments election was again nullified by the judgement of the Federal High Court in a decision handed down on November 30, 2022, in suit no FHC/OS/CS/103/2022 filed by the Action Peoples Party (APP). Although, the APC appealed that decision but abandoned it and as a consequence, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on January 13, 2025.

By the effect of law, the dismissal of an appeal restore the judgement of the lower court and make it binding until it was set aside by a superior court. In this case, the judgement of the lower court pronounced on the status of the October 15, 2022 election and those of the beneficiaries. That makes the judgement a judgement in rem and it is applicable to all parties, including those who who were never a party in suit no FHC/OS/CS/103/2022.

By the operation of the law, the judgement is a judgement in rem, meaning that it is binding to all parties who participated in the nullified election, whether they participated in the litigation or not. In DIKE & ORS V. NZEKA II & ORS (1986) LPELR-945 (SC), the Supreme Court underscored this point most lucidly when it held that “A judgment is said to be in rem when it is an adjudication pronounced upon the status of some particular thing or subject matter by a Tribunal having the jurisdiction and the competence to pronounce on that Status. Such a judgment is usually and invariably founded on proceedings instituted against or on something or subject-matter whose status or condition is to be determined. It is thus a solemn declaration on the status of some persons or thing. It is therefore binding on all persons in so far as their interests in the status of the property or person are concerned. That is why a judgment in rem is a judgment contra mundum – binding on the whole world – parties as well as non-parties.”

This fact was emphasized by Justice Chudi Obiorah in his lead judgement against the application by the APC to relist the dismissed appeal. He held that “Of course, the dismissal of the appeal means that there being no existing appeal against the judgment of the lower court, the said judgment stands as the authority defining the state of affairs as it regards the status of the officers of the various Local Government Councils in Osun State.”

Even more, the Presiding Judge of the Court of Appeal, Akure Division, Justice O.F Omoleye, in her concurring judgement affirmed the sack of the APC’s YES or NO officials before going ahead to hold that “… the fresh Local Government elections conducted on 22nd February 2025 and the swearing-in of new Chairmen and Councillors have overtaken the substratum of this dispute. Relisting the appeal at this stage would serve no practical purpose.”

I have observed the sheer ignorance that some commentators, particularly on the side of the APC, on the implication of the concurring decision of Justice Omoleye. It is even disturbing that supposed legal practitioners are caught in the web of deliberate attempt to cast aspersion on judicial pronouncement, raising serious concerns on the extent that the APC is prepared to go just to subvert justice. This poses grave danger to Nigeria’s democracy as the contempt which the Osun APC is treating judicial pronouncement, as long as it is against it, is anti-democratic.

In the recent case of NIGERIA ARMY COUNCIL & ORS v. ONYEACHU
(2025) LPELR-80760(SC), the Supreme Court held that “Concurrence/concurring opinion is defined in Black’s Law Dictionary 9th edition as follows: “A vote cast by a Judge in favour of the judgment reached, often on grounds differing from those expressed in the opinion or opinions explaining the judgment. A separate written opinion explaining such a vote” In the case of NWANA V. FCDA & ORS (2004) LPELR-2102(SC) (Pp.11-12 paras. F), his lordship, Tobi, J.S.C., while determining the weight to be given to a concurring judgment, held thus: “A concurring judgment complements, edifies and adds to the leading judgment. It could at times be an improvement of the leading judgment when the Justices add to it certain aspects which the writer of the leading judgment did not remember to deal with. In so far as a concurring judgment performs some or all the above functions, it has equal force with or as the leading judgment in so far as the principles of stare decisis are concerned. Per CHIDI NWAOMA UWA, JSC.

It is important to note that appellate courts, including the Supreme Court, affirmed or discard the decision of the lower court(s). In the most recent decision of the Supreme Court on the Rivers state local governments election, the Supreme Court simply affirmed the decision of the Federal High Court, which had nullified the election in the state. This is the same thing the January 13, 2025 decision of the Court of Appeal did, which was further affirmed by the June 13, 2025 ruling, which rejected the attempt by the APC to revive the dismissed appeal.

By the force of law, the November 30, 2022 judgement of the FHC which nullified the October 15, 2022 local governments election and sacked the beneficiaries of the election is valid and subsisting. There is yet another judgement that make a pronouncement on the election– not even the February 10, 2025 appeal court decision to struck out originating summon of the PDP– pronounced on the legal status of the sacked officials. I challenge anyone in the APC to provide any part in the February 10, 2022 decision of the Court of Appeal which made a pronouncement on the October 15, 2022 local governments election and the status of the beneficiaries.

For democracy to work, the judiciary remains a critical pillar and the APC must purge itself of desperation for power as it is doing with the disregard for judicial pronouncements. The only valid and subsisting judgement on the legal status of the October 15, 2022 local governments election and beneficiaries is the suit no FHC/OS/CS/103/2022, which is yet to set aside by any superior court. It is expected that the Attorney-General of the Federation, Prince Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), should tow the path of law and ensure the sanctity of rule of law by ensuring the respect for a valid and subsisting judgement.

• Sarafa Ibrahim writes from Osogbo, Osun State