Alaafin Drags Chieftaincy Crisis To Supreme Court, Seeks Immediate Halt To Ago-Oja Elevation

In a motion on notice dated January 30, 2026, and filed under Appeal No. SC/404/2018, the monarch is requesting both interlocutory and mandatory injunctions against Governor Seyi Makinde and the state Attorney-General, pending the final resolution of the appeal before the apex court.

The application recalls that the Oyo State High Court in 2007 declared the Baale Ago-Oja stool non-existent, a ruling that was affirmed by the Court of Appeal, Ibadan Division, in 2017.

Counsel to the Alaafin, Adeola Omotunde (SAN), argued that any move to revive, recognise, or elevate a chieftaincy previously nullified by competent courts would be a direct violation of subsisting judgments.

Specifically, the monarch is asking the Supreme Court to stop the proposed installation of Busari scheduled for February 13, 2026, at Olivet High School, Oyo, or any other venue. He is also seeking an order setting aside Oyo State Gazette No. 01, Vol. 50 of January 17, 2025, to the extent that it relates to the elevation of the Baale Ago-Oja title.

The motion further urges the court to restrain the state government from taking any steps to create, re-create, recognise, or elevate the stool, or from presenting and acknowledging Busari in any official capacity.

In addition, Omotunde’s law firm wrote to Governor Makinde on February 8, 2026, cautioning that moving forward with the coronation would constitute illegality and contempt of court.

The letter referenced a 2007 judgment delivered by Justice S. Olu Akinola in Suit No. HOY/46/2006, which held that the title “Baale of Ago-Oja” does not exist in Atiba Local Government Area and declared Busari’s earlier approval null and void.

Although Busari appealed the decision, the Court of Appeal dismissed the case in 2017. His subsequent appeal to the Supreme Court, filed in 2018, is said to have stalled due to the failure to submit a brief of argument.

Describing the state government’s recent actions as unconstitutional, the Alaafin’s legal team maintained that it defies both law and logic to revive a chieftaincy already declared non-existent by a court of competent jurisdiction. They warned that proceeding with the coronation could portray the government as disregarding the rule of law.

The Supreme Court is yet to fix a hearing date for the appeal and the accompanying motion.