.
Tension mounted around the Oyo State High Court in Ibadan on Monday as Justice Ladiran Akintola once again postponed the hearing of a Motion on Notice in the case filed by Folahan Malomo Adelabi against the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), its Acting National Chairman, and other respondents.
The case which has drawn increasing political attention in the lead-up to the party’s National Convention has been adjourned to Wednesday, November 12, 2025, after the court granted additional time for all parties to file and exchange the required documents.
Justice Akintola, after hearing the submissions from counsel on both sides, emphasized the necessity of properly filing all relevant documents before the commencement of substantive proceedings.
The judge stated that the adjournment was necessary to allow the court to consider all pending applications together for a smooth and orderly hearing.
It will be recalled that, in a ruling delivered last week, the court granted an ex-parte order allowing the PDP to continue preparations for its scheduled National Convention, while fixing Monday, November 10, for the hearing of the Motion on Notice.
At the heart of the case is the claimant’s request for an order restraining the defendants — Acting National Chairman Umar Iliya Damagum, Adamawa State Governor Rt. Hon. Ahmadu Umaru Fintiri (in his capacity as Chairman of the National Convention Organising Committee), and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) — from taking any action that could disrupt or hinder the smooth conduct of the convention.
The court had earlier directed the PDP leadership to adhere strictly to the guidelines, timetable, and schedule of activities previously issued for the convention, cautioning against any deviation that might compromise internal party democracy.
Meanwhile, in a dramatic turn of events outside the courtroom, journalists who arrived to cover the proceedings were denied entry.
Security personnel stationed at key points around the court premises enforced tight restrictions, effectively barring reporters from gaining access.
The heavy security presence, with officers from multiple agencies guarding the court’s gates and corridors, sparked speculation that the case’s political sensitivity was behind the extra precautions.
