The Ondo State House of Assembly has firmly stated that the recent apology offered by the embattled Deputy Governor, Mr. Lucky Aiyedatiwa, to Governor Rotimi Akeredolu will not deter the ongoing process to impeach him.
Aiyedatiwa extended his apology to Governor Akeredolu, expressing regret for the political turmoil in the state and pledging his loyalty to the governor. However, the Speaker of the Assembly, Mr. Olamide Oladiji, asserted that Aiyedatiwa’s apology is a matter solely between the deputy governor and the governor, and it does not concern the 26 members of the state assembly.
Addressing the situation, Oladiji emphasized, “The apology is a personal issue between the deputy governor and the governor, not a concern of the 26 members of the state assembly.”
The Majority Leader of the Assembly, Mr. Oluwole Ogunmolasuyi, also chimed in to clarify that Assembly members are not divided over the impeachment process regarding Aiyedatiwa. He countered rumors of division among the lawmakers, asserting that they remain united in their determination to probe and impeach the deputy governor.
Furthermore, Mr. Aiyedatiwa took a significant step by urging Justice Emeka Nwite to recuse himself from the suit he filed to halt his impeachment process. Aiyedatiwa’s legal team, led by Mr. Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN, asked the judge to suspend the ongoing proceedings, highlighting that the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal is now seized of the case.
The deputy governor’s lawyers argued that since both the Speaker of the Assembly and the legislative house itself had filed an appeal to set aside the interim order blocking the impeachment, proceeding with the case would put the court in a potential conflict with a superior authority.
In their plea, Aiyedatiwa’s lawyers pointed out, “The appeal will impact the proceedings of this court, and as Ministers in the temple of justice, the defendants owe this court the sacred duty of full disclosure of any development that may affect the jurisdiction of the court.”
Consequently, they suggested that it would be more appropriate to withdraw from the case and allow the appellate court to make the final determination, considering the proceedings already initiated at the higher court.
