2027: Court Fixes Nov. 24 For Judgment On Suit Challenging Omo-Agege’s NDC Ticket

The Federal High Court in Warri has fixed November 24, 2026, for judgment in the suit challenging the Delta Central senatorial ticket of the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) won by former Deputy Senate President, Senator Ovie Omo-Agege.

Justice Hyeladzira Ajiya Nganjiwa reserved judgment in Suit No. FHC/WR/CS/120/2026 filed by Alexander Osondu Akpodiete after hearing arguments from all parties.

The major issue before the court is the actual date Senator Omo-Agege resigned from the All Progressives Congress (APC).

Counsel to the plaintiff, Mr. Damian Dodo, SAN, told the court that Omo-Agege resigned on May 18, 2026, exhibiting a letter to that effect.

But Omo-Agege’s counsel, Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu, SAN, countered with an affidavit deposed to by the APC itself confirming that the only resignation letter duly acknowledged by the party was dated May 5, 2026.

Ikpeazu argued that resignation takes effect from the date of receipt and acknowledgment, and that once acknowledged on May 5, whatever the APC did with Omo-Agege’s name afterwards cannot legally bind him.

Advertisement

The NDC, on its part, challenged the plaintiff’s locus standi, arguing that Akpodiete did not obtain its senatorial nomination form, was not screened and his name was not in the INEC report on the May 29 primaries.

The plaintiff’s counsel argued that his client obtained the Expression of Interest form, a claim that sparked debate in court on whether that alone confers locus standi.

On the NDC membership register, the plaintiff argued it was impossible for Omo-Agege’s name to have been in the register submitted to INEC if he resigned from APC on May 18. The defence, however, presented the Certified True Copy of the NDC register submitted to INEC by INEC, NDC and Omo-Agege, showing his name is contained therein, satisfying Section 77 of the Electoral Act.

The court also heard arguments over INEC’s last-minute change of counsel and attempt to withdraw all processes earlier filed. Ikpeazu insisted that while counsel can withdraw processes, affidavit evidence already before the court cannot be withdrawn except by the deponent.

He also raised a preliminary objection that the originating summons was signed by a person whose name is not on the Roll of Legal Practitioners, which the plaintiff’s counsel dismissed as a clerical error.

Another contention was over the plaintiff’s reliance on an uncertified private copy of a document purported to be a register. The plaintiff argued he filed a copy of his application for the CTC, but Ikpeazu insisted only a CTC or original is admissible under the Evidence Act.

Advertisement

There was tension in and around the court as observers noted that vehicles conveying the plaintiff’s legal team bore Delta State Government House number plates (DTGH), raising questions about the interest of the state government in the matter.

Justice Nganjiwa adjourned to November 24 for judgment.