…Key Admissions Shake Claimant’s Case
A major shift occurred on Wednesday in the defamation suit filed by former Ekiti State Governor, Dr. Kayode Fayemi, against Omoyele Sowore and Sahara Reporters, as the Claimant’s star witness struggled under intense cross-examination, making admissions that undercut the foundation of the case.
The matter, Dr. Kayode Fayemi v. Omoyele Sowore & Sahara Reporters, came up on 19 November 2025 for the cross-examination of the Claimant’s first witness, PW1, Barr. Ashishana Bayo Okauru, a former Director-General of the Nigerian Governors’ Forum.
While the Claimant was absent, the 1st Defendant, Omoyele Sowore, was present. The 2nd Defendant was absent. The Claimant was represented by S. I. Ameh, SAN, who led fifteen other lawyers, while the Defendants were represented by Tope Temokun, leading Peter Asimegbe, Esq., and Michael Effiwal, Esq.
Under sustained questioning, Okauru—who had earlier described Fayemi as “upright and incorruptible”, and as someone he had known since 1984—made several admissions that cast doubt on his earlier testimony and the overall credibility of the suit.
On the controversial Paris Club refund and the allegations of bribe-seeking, which form the crux of the Claimant’s case, the witness admitted that contractors involved in the refund processes held meetings with Fayemi and others which he did not attend. He conceded that he could not state whether bribes were exchanged but confirmed that the contractors alleged that kick-back demands were made at those meetings.
Despite his glowing characterisation of the former governor, Okauru acknowledged that apart from the six years they worked together—during his tenure as DG of the Forum and Fayemi’s time as Chairman—he knew little about Fayemi’s private life.
Okauru also conceded that although Fayemi commissioned the Ekiti State Airport before leaving office in 2022, it was not until 2025 that he first read a report indicating that an aircraft had actually landed there.
These and other disclosures during the session dealt a blow to the Claimant’s attempt to present an unblemished reputation.
Following the detailed cross-examination, counsel for the Claimant requested an adjournment to enable them file a motion seeking leave to call an additional witness.
The court adjourned the matter to February 25, 2026 for further proceedings.
Leave a Reply