The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has disowned a legal petition purportedly filed on its behalf to challenge Governor Ademola Adeleke’s re-election in Osun State, saying the party neither authorised nor endorsed the case.
The clarification came on Wednesday, September 9, 2026, after the Osun State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal in Osogbo displayed a petition identified as EPT/OS/GOV/02/2026, with PDP governorship candidate Adebayo Olugbenga Adedamola listed as the petitioner.
PDP National Publicity Secretary Jungudo Haruna Mohammed said the party had not instructed anyone to institute proceedings against Adeleke or challenge the outcome of the August 15 governorship election.
The party said it had begun steps to formally dissociate itself from the petition and determine how the document came to be filed in its name.
The development has created an unusual situation in the post-election dispute, coming shortly after the tribunal displayed petitions purportedly filed by both the PDP and the All Progressives Congress (APC) against Adeleke’s victory.
Mohammed said the PDP’s internal rules specify who can commence litigation on behalf of the national party.
According to the party, the National Legal Adviser is the official empowered under its constitution to initiate legal proceedings on the party’s behalf.
The clarification means the existence of a petition bearing the name of a PDP candidate does not, by itself, establish that the party authorised the litigation.
The PDP said it neither sponsored nor approved the petition challenging Adeleke’s victory.
The party is now seeking to establish how the petition reached the tribunal and who instructed the legal practitioners involved.
What the PDP Is Disputing
The party’s position centres on three issues:
- It says it did not authorise the petition.
- It says no person was instructed to institute the case on its behalf.
- It is taking steps to formally withdraw or dissociate itself from the filing.
The development has also raised questions about the relationship between the party’s official structure and the individual named as petitioner.
The party’s position is consistent with comments from Adebayo Adedamola, who was the PDP’s governorship candidate in the August 15 election.
Adedamola said he neither filed nor authorised a petition challenging Adeleke’s return.
He also said he had not instructed his lawyer to contest the election result and was unaware of the petition displayed by the tribunal.
His denial is significant because the petition, numbered EPT/OS/GOV/02/2026, identifies him as the petitioner and names Adeleke, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and the Accord Party as respondents.
Adedamola further indicated that there had been no meeting at which the PDP decided to challenge the election result.
His comments therefore add another layer to the controversy surrounding the origin and authorisation of the petition.
The controversy emerged after the Osun State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal displayed two separate petitions on its notice board in Osogbo on September 7.
The documents were dated September 5 and concerned the August 15 election that returned Adeleke for another term.
The two petitions were identified as:
| Petition | Purported Petitioner | Main Respondents |
|---|---|---|
| EPT/OS/GOV/01/2026 | APC and Bola Oyebamiji | Adeleke, Accord, INEC |
| EPT/OS/GOV/02/2026 | Adebayo Adedamola/PDP | Adeleke, INEC, Accord |
The tribunal secretary, Pefe Belemore, confirmed that petitions challenging the election had been filed.
However, subsequent statements from both the PDP and its candidate have cast doubt on the authorisation behind the second petition.
The PDP controversy unfolded alongside a separate dispute over the APC petition.
The APC’s legal team in Osun initially disowned a petition filed in the party’s name against Adeleke, despite the document having been displayed by the tribunal.
The lawyer who filed that petition, Oluseyi Oyagbile, later withdrew it after saying he received fresh instructions from the APC and its leaders.
The withdrawal means the two petitions initially displayed by the tribunal have now faced fundamentally different developments.
The APC petition has been withdrawn, while the PDP is attempting to distance itself from the petition purportedly filed on its behalf.
That sequence has raised questions about internal coordination among political parties and their legal representatives immediately after a closely watched governorship election.
Adeleke won the August 15 governorship election and was returned for another term. The subsequent appearance of petitions at the tribunal initially suggested that both major opposition parties were preparing to challenge the result.
However, the subsequent withdrawals and denials have significantly altered that picture.
For the PDP, the immediate concern is no longer simply whether to challenge the election. It is also to determine how a petition came before the tribunal bearing the name of its candidate without, according to the party and candidate, proper authorisation.
The issue could have wider implications because election petitions are formal legal proceedings with strict requirements concerning parties, representation, filing and timelines.
The controversy raises several important questions:
- Who prepared and submitted the PDP petition?
- Who instructed the lawyer involved?
- Was the PDP candidate aware of the filing?
- Did any authorised PDP officer approve the action?
- What will happen to the petition after the party’s disavowal?
- Will the tribunal require clarification from the parties involved?
The PDP’s decision to publicly disown the petition appears aimed at preventing the legal action from being interpreted as an official challenge by the party to Adeleke’s re-election.
The party’s national leadership is expected to investigate the circumstances surrounding the filing while pursuing the appropriate legal steps to establish its position before the tribunal.
For Adeleke, the development removes one immediate source of uncertainty surrounding the post-election legal landscape, although other political and legal issues may still emerge.
The governor’s re-election remains subject to the wider electoral and constitutional processes governing challenges to election results.
The next stage will depend on how the Osun election petition tribunal treats the PDP’s position and any formal application made by the party or the purported petitioner.
The PDP’s clarification does not by itself determine the legal status of the petition. The tribunal will ultimately have to consider the relevant filings and applications before it.
For now, however, the party has made its position clear: it says the petition challenging Adeleke’s victory was not authorised by the PDP.
The episode highlights the importance of clear internal authority and coordination between political parties, candidates and legal representatives in the highly time-sensitive period immediately after an election.
As the Osun election dispute develops, the focus will shift from the initial appearance of the petition to determining who actually authorised it and whether it can legally proceed.
