The High Court of Justice of Ekiti State, sitting in Ado-Ekiti, has ordered the Chairman of Ekiti South West Local Government Area, Hon. Richard Apolola, and the member representing Ekiti South West Constituency I in the Ekiti State House of Assembly, Hon. Letty Kehinde Adaramodu, to release their scorecards and reports on budgetary allocations and constituency project funds to an applicant, Mr. Adekunle Esan.
Justice A. A. Adeleye delivered the judgment on Wednesday, June 24, 2026, in Suit No. HAD/9/2026, filed by Esan against the two public officers.
The applicant had approached the court by originating summons, relying on Sections 36 and 39 of the 1999 Constitution and Sections 2, 4, 5, 8 and 22 of the Ekiti State Freedom of Information Law.
He asked the court to determine whether the respondents violated his right of access to public records when they allegedly refused, neglected or failed to provide information requested in letters dated August 5, 2025.
The information sought included the respondents’ scorecards as elected public officers, comprehensive reports of all budgetary sums allocated to Ekiti South West Local Government Area and Ekiti South West Constituency I, funds allocated and disbursed as constituency projects, administrative records and other related information.
Esan also sought a declaration that the respondents’ failure to provide the requested information within the statutory period was unlawful, illegal and a violation of his right of access to public information under the Freedom of Information Law.
He further asked the court to compel the respondents to provide the information within 14 days, and also claimed ₦10 million as damages and ₦5 million as cost of retaining solicitors.
The respondents, however, challenged the competence of the suit through a notice of preliminary objection.
They argued that the action was filed outside the time allowed by law, that the applicant had no cause of action or locus standi against them, that the suit was grossly incompetent, and that the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain it.
The respondents contended that under the Ekiti State Freedom of Information Law, they had 14 days to respond to the applicant’s request, and that any action challenging their refusal ought to have been filed within 30 days after the expiration of that period.
They argued that since the applicant filed the originating summons on January 15, 2026, the suit was statute-barred.
In response, the applicant argued that the Freedom of Information Law did not impose a mandatory 30-day limitation period extinguishing his right of action.
He maintained that the refusal to release the requested information amounted to a continuing denial of his statutory right and that the court had jurisdiction to entertain the matter.
Justice Adeleye held that the respondents, having been served with the originating summons and accompanying processes, ought to have filed a counter-affidavit to dispute the facts placed before the court.
The court held that instead of filing a counter-affidavit, the respondents elected to file a preliminary objection, which the court described as tantamount to a demurrer.
Relying on the rules of court, the judge held that demurrer had been abolished in civil proceedings and that the preliminary objection could not take the place of a counter-affidavit.
The court consequently struck out the respondents’ preliminary objection.
Justice Adeleye further held that in the absence of a counter-affidavit, the facts contained in the applicant’s affidavit were unchallenged and deemed admitted.
On jurisdiction, the court held that it had the power to entertain the suit because the applicant was seeking to enforce a statutory right created under the Ekiti State Freedom of Information Law.
The judge also rejected the respondents’ argument that the suit was statute-barred.
According to the court, Section 22(1) of the Ekiti State Freedom of Information Law, which provides that an applicant may approach the court within 30 days, is permissive and not mandatory.
Justice Adeleye held that the provision did not declare that any action filed outside 30 days would be incompetent, adding that it did not extinguish the applicant’s right of action.
The court therefore found that the cause of action was not statute-barred.
In the final decision, the court declared that the applicant was entitled to access the information requested from the respondents, being the elected chairman of Ekiti South West Local Government Area and the member representing Ekiti South West Constituency I in the Ekiti State House of Assembly.
The court also declared that the respondents’ failure, refusal or neglect to provide the requested information in response to the applicant’s letters dated August 5, 2025, within the statutory period was unlawful, illegal and a violation of the applicant’s right of access to public information under the Freedom of Information Law.
Justice Adeleye ordered the respondents to provide their scorecards as elected public officers, comprehensive reports of all budgetary sums allocated to Ekiti South West Local Government Area and Ekiti South West Constituency I, funds allocated and disbursed as constituency projects, administrative records and other information requested by the applicant.
However, the court declined to award damages against the respondents.
JUDGEMENT (ADEKUNLE ESAN V RICHARD APOLOLA
It also ordered the parties to bear their respective costs.
Olaniran Obile, Esq., and Olawale Ikuomola, Esq., appeared for the applicant, while Gbemiga Adaramola, Acting Solicitor-General and Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Justice; Olatunde Olayemi, Esq., Senior Legal Officer; and Adeola Awe, Esq., Senior Legal Officer, appeared for the respondents.
The post Court Orders Ekiti LG Chairman, Lawmaker To Release Scorecards, Constituency Project Funds Report Under FOI Law appeared first on TheNigeriaLawyer.
