The leadership crisis rocking the Accord Party in Oyo State took a fresh legal twist on Monday as the Federal High Court sitting in Ibadan adjourned proceedings in a suit challenging the party’s 2027 governorship candidate following a dispute over who has the legitimate authority to represent the party in court.
The development stalled the hearing of the suit before Justice Uche Agomoh, who adjourned the matter until September 30, 2026, to allow the parties resolve the controversy surrounding the conflicting legal representations.
The case, which could have significant implications for Accord’s governorship ticket ahead of the 2027 general elections, could not proceed to the substantive application after two lawyers appeared to claim authority to represent the party.
Rather than entertain the application, the court directed the concerned parties to first resolve the dispute over legal representation before substantive proceedings could continue.
The suit, marked FHC/IB/CS/97/26, was instituted by Olakunle Busari through his counsel, Tunji Ogunrinde, SAN.
Busari is asking the court to direct the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to remove the name of Alhaji Oriyomi Hamzat, which he alleged was uploaded on the commission’s portal by a faction of the Accord leadership, and replace it with his own name as the authentic governorship candidate of the party in Oyo State for the 2027 election.
However, the emergence of rival counsel claiming to represent Accord became the immediate stumbling block to the hearing, forcing the court to suspend consideration of the substantive application.
Speaking with journalists shortly after the proceedings, Ogunrinde said the court had directed the parties to resolve the dispute over representation before the case could proceed.
He said, “The court has directed the parties to resolve the issue of legal representation before the matter can proceed.
“The application before the court could not be taken because of the conflicting representations, and the parties are expected to address and resolve the issue before the next adjourned date.”
The development has triggered fresh concerns within the Oyo State chapter of Accord, with the party’s State Secretary, Dairo Olayinka, expressing surprise over the appearance of another lawyer who claimed to be acting for the party.
Olayinka said the party’s executives had already appointed a counsel to represent its interests in the matter and formally issued a letter authorising the lawyer to appear on its behalf.
He consequently questioned the authority under which another legal representative emerged in a case involving the party.
Also reacting, the Southwest leader of Accord, Mogaji Igbinsola Sunday, described the development as an attempt to frustrate or delay the proceedings.
He maintained that the question of who has the legitimate authority to represent Accord must be resolved before the next sitting, stressing that the party’s interests must be presented before the court by a duly authorised representative.
“We see this development as an attempt to delay the proceedings. The issue of proper legal representation must be settled before the next sitting because the interests of Accord must be properly and legitimately presented before the court,” Igbinsola said.
The National Secretary of Accord, Ajaja Adebukola, also faulted the emergence of another counsel, alleging that the individual who engaged the lawyer lacked the authority to do so on behalf of the party.
According to her, the authority to determine who represents Accord in court rests with the duly recognised and authorised leadership of the party.
She said, “The emergence of another counsel is unacceptable because the individual who engaged the lawyer did not have the authority to do so on behalf of Accord.
“Only the duly authorised leadership of the organisation has the power to determine who represents the party in this matter.”
The adjournment has further exposed the depth of the internal leadership dispute within Accord in Oyo State, coming at a critical period when political parties are expected to consolidate their structures and settle questions surrounding their candidates ahead of the 2027 elections.
With the dispute over representation now before the court, the fate of the competing claims to Accord’s governorship ticket remains unresolved, while the September 30 adjourned date is expected to provide an opportunity for the parties to clarify who has the legitimate authority to speak for the party in the suit.