The Ogun State Government has reconstituted the Awujale Interregnum Administrative Council (AIAC), declaring that it remains the only legally recognised body authorised to oversee the administrative and traditional affairs of Ijebuland pending the emergence of a new Awujale.
Government’s action followed the reported withdrawal of some members of the council and the emergence of an alternative body known as the Adele Oba Awujale-in-Council.
The development marks a fresh turn in the dispute over the appropriate administrative structure for Ijebuland during the interregnum following the death of the late Awujale, Oba Sikiru Kayode Adetona, in July 2025.
Traditional chiefs had only recently resolved to replace the AIAC with the Adele Oba Awujale-in-Council, arguing that the arrangement was supported by existing customary and statutory frameworks.
However, in a statement issued by the Commissioner for Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs, Ganiyu Hamzat, the state government rejected that position, maintaining that the withdrawal of individual members could not dissolve or invalidate the AIAC.
According to the government, the council was established in August 2025 to manage Ijebuland’s administrative and traditional responsibilities during the period between the death of the former monarch and the appointment and coronation of his successor.
Government also clarified that Chief Chris Okunowo, the Bobasuwa, and Chief Rasheed Adeoye Adesanya, the Olisa of Ijebu-Ode, had publicly dissociated themselves from the reported mass withdrawal.
The reconstituted council comprises:
- Chief Rasheed Adesanya (Olisa) – Chairman
- Chief Chris Okunowo (Bobasuwa) – Secretary
- Prof. Jide Ajayi (Jagun Aso) – Member
- Chief Stephen O. Bakare (Babalaje) – Member
- Chief Alade Shote (Otun Balogun) – Member
The government said the reconstituted AIAC would continue to exercise its responsibilities until a new Awujale is appointed and crowned.
Government rejects Adele Oba Awujale council
Hamzat said the Adele Oba Awujale-in-Council had no legal or customary recognition under the Awujale Chieftaincy Declaration or the existing chieftaincy laws of Ogun State.
He specifically stated that neither the Awujale Chieftaincy Declaration nor the Obas and Chiefs Law of Ogun State 2021 created such a body or assigned it any responsibility for managing the Awujale stool.
The commissioner also rejected reliance on the Chiefs Law of 1957, which members of the alternative body reportedly cited in support of their position.
According to the state, the 1957 legislation was enacted before Nigeria’s independence and no longer governs Ogun State, which has operated under its own laws since its creation in 1976.
The chiefs who established the alternative council had argued differently, maintaining that the 2021 law does not expressly establish an Awujale Regency Council or prescribe a general procedure for appointing a regent during an interregnum.
They also argued that the 1957 declaration provided a framework for customary arrangements, including the Adele Oba Awujale-in-Council.
Government cites court judgment
Ogun State also based its position on a consent judgment of the Ogun State High Court in Suit No. HCJ/180/2025, involving Rasheed Adeoye Adesanya, the Olisa of Ijebu-Ode, against the Executive Council of Ogun State and 16 others.
The government said all members of the AIAC were parties to the case and consented to the judgment, which affirmed the legality, validity and authority of the administrative body established by the state.
It further said the judgment recognised the AIAC’s responsibility for overseeing the administrative and traditional affairs of Ijebu-Ode pending the appointment and coronation of a new Awujale.
According to the government, the court also provided that where a conflict arose between the responsibilities of the administrative body and the traditional functions of the Olisa, the authority of the administrative body would take precedence.
The state stressed that the judgment had not been appealed and remained binding on the parties.
While acknowledging that individual members had the right to withdraw from the council, government maintained that such withdrawals could not confer legal authority on another body to assume the AIAC’s responsibilities.
It consequently warned members of the public against conducting official transactions or administrative dealings with individuals who had withdrawn from the AIAC while presenting themselves as members of an alternative administrative body.
Former council members were also urged to avoid actions capable of contravening the law or threatening peace and stability in Ijebuland.
The government reaffirmed its commitment to the rule of law and established traditional institutions, while promising to support a peaceful and transparent process for filling the vacant Awujale stool.
The latest development deepens an emerging disagreement between the state government and sections of the Ijebu traditional establishment over who should exercise administrative authority during the succession period.
