Group alleges plot to influence court ruling on Aondoakaa’s eligibility suit
By Julius Alabi, Akure
A pressure group, Benue Equity and Justice Movement, has accused former Attorney-General of the Federation and Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) governorship candidate in Benue State, Michael Aondoakaa, of allegedly attempting to influence the judiciary ahead of the November 16 judgment in a suit challenging his eligibility to contest the 2027 governorship election.
The group alleged that Aondoakaa had held meetings with some political associates and members of his legal team to explore ways of influencing the judge handling the case. It, however, did not provide publicly verifiable evidence to substantiate the allegation in its statement.
The allegation comes amid a legal battle over the former minister’s eligibility, with the plaintiffs asking the Federal High Court in Abuja to prevent him from parading himself as the PDP governorship candidate on the grounds of an earlier court judgment said to have barred him from holding public office.
In a statement issued on Thursday and signed by its General Secretary, Kingsley Asema, the group said it had received intelligence suggesting that the former AGF was allegedly making efforts to compromise the judicial process because of concerns over the outcome of the case.
According to the statement, Aondoakaa had allegedly held a series of meetings with former Benue State Governor Samuel Ortom and members of his legal team, led by a former Secretary to the State Government, Tony Ijohor, to discuss how to influence the judgment.
The group further alleged that a final meeting on the purported plan was held in Jos last Friday, with Aondoakaa, Ijohor, Clement Mue, Anthony Malik and Matthew Onoja reportedly in attendance.
It claimed that members of the legal team had advised Aondoakaa to reach the judge through an unnamed Senior Advocate of Nigeria based in Jos, following concerns that the court might rule against his eligibility.
“We have it on good authority that Barrister Michael Aondoakaa, having realised that the eligibility suit against him in court may not go in his favour, based on the evidence that he had been barred from holding public office, has been holding a series of meetings with his political godfather, Mr Samuel Ortom, and his legal team on possible ways to influence the judge handling the case,” the statement alleged.
The eligibility dispute is linked to a Supreme Court judgment delivered on December 10, 2021, in the case involving Aondoakaa and Emmanuel Bassey Obot.
The apex court, in a unanimous decision delivered by Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, affirmed the earlier judgment restraining Aondoakaa from holding public office, following findings concerning his conduct while serving as Attorney-General of the Federation under the late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua.
The Federal High Court had, in its judgment of June 1, 2010, declared that Aondoakaa undermined the rule of law and the administration of justice through correspondence written in his official capacity. The Court of Appeal subsequently affirmed the decision before the Supreme Court upheld it in 2021.
In September, four Benue indigenes, David Ejembi, Aondoaver Teryila, Joseph Okpanachi and Benedict Akaazua Orkume, instituted a fresh action at the Federal High Court, Abuja, seeking to stop Aondoakaa from contesting the 2027 governorship election.
The plaintiffs, in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2152/2026, joined the Independent National Electoral Commission, the PDP and Aondoakaa as defendants, asking the court to determine the implications of the Supreme Court judgment for his eligibility to contest the election.
Another governorship aspirant, Damian Adagba of the Allied People’s Movement, had also reportedly approached the court in September, seeking an order compelling INEC to remove Aondoakaa’s name from its portal as the PDP governorship candidate.
Meanwhile, Benue Equity and Justice Movement has appealed to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court and the Chief Justice of Nigeria to intervene by ensuring that the November 16 judgment is delivered without interference.
The group said the allegations required urgent attention to protect the integrity and independence of the judiciary, warning that any attempt to compromise the judicial process would undermine public confidence in the administration of justice.
It described the case as an important test of the judiciary’s commitment to the rule of law, insisting that the court must be allowed to determine the dispute strictly on its merits and the evidence presented by the parties.
The group added that the judiciary remained the last hope of ordinary Nigerians and urged judicial authorities to take necessary steps to safeguard the process against any form of external pressure.
It maintained that the November 16 judgment would be closely watched by Nigerians, particularly the people of Benue State, given the legal and political implications of the dispute.
