PDP council chairmen moved to reclaim Osun State local government secretariats on 20 June 2026, acting on a Federal High Court judgment delivered five days earlier, while the APC's application for a stay of execution at the trial court and its appeal at the Court of Appeal, Akure Division, both filed 16 June, remain unresolved.
PDP council chairmen in Osun State moved on 20 June 2026 to resume control of local government secretariats across the state, acting on the strength of a Federal High Court judgment delivered on 15 June 2026. The move unfolded while a stay of execution application filed at the trial court and an appeal filed at the Court of Appeal, Akure Division — both filed the previous day by the affected APC chairmen — remained pending and unheard.
The Federal High Court sitting in Osogbo, presided over by Justice Adefunmilola A. Demi-Ajayi, dismissed Suit No. FHC/OS/CS/147/2025 on 15 June 2026. The suit had been brought by council chairmen and councillors elected under the All Progressives Congress at the Osun State local government elections of 15 October 2022. In that suit, the APC-elected officials sought a determination that interruptions to their time in office entitled them to an extension of their three-year constitutional tenure beyond October 2025. The court rejected that argument. Justice Demi-Ajayi held, that no matter the interruptions or interjections in the tenure of an elected public officer after subscription to the oath of office and oath of allegiance, the expiration date of the tenure remains the same as fixed by the constitution or statute.
On 16 June 2026 — one day after judgment — the APC chairmen, through counsel, filed two separate instruments: a motion for stay of execution before Justice Demi-Ajayi at the Federal High Court, Osogbo; and a notice of appeal at the Court of Appeal, Akure Division, raising six grounds of appeal. As of 20 June 2026, neither the stay application nor the substantive appeal had been heard or determined.
The enforcement events of 20 June
On the morning of 20 June 2026, PDP-elected council chairmen, whose mandate dates from the Osun State local government election of November 2024, presented themselves at a number of council secretariats across the state, asserting entitlement to resume office on the basis of the 15 June judgment. The Osun State Government had, by a letter confirmed by multiple reports to the state's Assistant Inspector-General of Police, separately sought police security to facilitate resumption of the PDP officials.
Resumptions were reported at some councils, including Ede North, Ede South, Iwo, Ila, and Ifelodun local government areas. At the Olorunda Local Government Secretariat in Igbona, Osogbo, a confrontation arose at the premises gate. Police operatives deployed to the scene. APC-elected officials were reported to have remained in occupation at a number of councils, including Boripe, Obokun, Oriade, and Ilesa East. Police deployments across affected councils were confirmed by multiple reports as aimed at restoring calm.
The stay of execution mechanism: what it means and why it matters
A stay of execution is an order that suspends the operation of a judgment pending an appeal. Under the law, a party may apply to the trial court for a stay; if refused, the applicant may renew the application before the appellate court. Until such an order is granted, a judgment creditor is ordinarily entitled to enforce. The pendency of an appeal — or even of a stay application — does not, by itself, suspend enforcement.
This procedural gap is at the heart of the present dispute. Because the Federal High Court had not granted a stay as of 20 June 2026, the PDP chairmen's move to enforce is consistent with the general position under Nigerian civil procedure. However, should the Court of Appeal ultimately allow the APC's appeal and set aside the judgment, any enforcement steps taken in the interim could become legally consequential. Parties who enforced a subsequently overturned judgment may face questions about restoration of the position; parties who resisted enforcement in reliance on a pending stay application that was never granted carry their own exposure.
The constitutional dimension: section 7 and local government autonomy
The underlying dispute engages section 7 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), which guarantees the system of democratically elected local government councils. The Federal High Court's holding — that constitutional tenure runs from oath-taking and is not extended by interruptions — reflects an approach broadly consistent with the section 7 guarantee: that local government leadership must derive from the electorate and cannot be extended by administrative or judicial delay.
The APC's appeal will ask the Court of Appeal to review that holding. The court's resolution of that question will have implications beyond Osun State, given that questions of local government tenure, council transitions, and state-federal authority over local governance have arisen in litigation across multiple states in recent election cycles.
What happens next
The APC's stay application before Justice Demi-Ajayi at the Federal High Court, Osogbo, and its appeal before the Court of Appeal, Akure Division, are both pending as of the date of publication. The Federal High Court has not set a date for hearing the stay application that is confirmed in the public record; the Court of Appeal has not scheduled the appeal.
Should the Federal High Court grant the stay application, enforcement would be suspended pending the appeal's outcome. Should the Federal High Court refuse, the APC may apply to the Court of Appeal for the same relief. If both applications are refused, enforcement of the 15 June judgment would proceed unimpeded pending appeal.
The Osun State Government's letter seeking police backing for the PDP officials remains a parallel political and security dimension to proceedings that are fundamentally judicial in character. The police response — described in multiple reports as directed at maintaining peace rather than taking sides on the merits — reflects the difficulty that enforcement of a contested judgment presents to public order authorities.
