THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND COMMISSIONER FOR JUSTICE,
ANAMBRA STATE & ORS. V. ROBERT C. OKAFOR & ORS.
(1992) LPELR-3156(SC)
In The Supreme Court of Nigeria
On
Friday, the 21st day of February, 1992
SC.172/1988
Before Their Lordships
MUHAMMADU
LAWAL UWAIS Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
PHILLIP
NNAEMEKA-AGU Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
OLAJIDE
OLATAWURA Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
UCHE OMO
Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
BOLARINWA
OYEGOKE BABALAKIN Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
Between
1. THE
ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND COMMISSIONER FOR JUSTICE, ANAMBRA STATE
2. ANAMBRA STATE COMMISSIONER FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT, RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND CHIEFTAINCY MATTERS
3. SOLE ADMINISTRATOR, AWKA LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA R.N.OKENWA
4. OZO DR. S.E. ONEJEME
5. OZO A.C.NDIGWE - Appellant(s)
2. ANAMBRA STATE COMMISSIONER FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT, RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND CHIEFTAINCY MATTERS
3. SOLE ADMINISTRATOR, AWKA LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA R.N.OKENWA
4. OZO DR. S.E. ONEJEME
5. OZO A.C.NDIGWE - Appellant(s)
AND
1. ROBERT
C. OKAFOR
2. OKAFOR EZEKWEM
3. OZO ODILI OBIORAH
4. EZEANA NWOSU ILOANYA
5 CHIEF C. CHINWUKO
6. NNEBE AGUMADU
(Suing for themselves and on behalf of the Ozo's Ndichies and Ezeanas of Agulu and Amikwo Communities Awka) - Respondent(s)
2. OKAFOR EZEKWEM
3. OZO ODILI OBIORAH
4. EZEANA NWOSU ILOANYA
5 CHIEF C. CHINWUKO
6. NNEBE AGUMADU
(Suing for themselves and on behalf of the Ozo's Ndichies and Ezeanas of Agulu and Amikwo Communities Awka) - Respondent(s)
Other Citations
A.G.
Anambra State v. Okafor (1992) NWLR (Pt. 224) 396
Summary
The
defendants/appellants and the 4th and 5th respondents have been engaged in a
tussle as to who has the right to select. Install, and indeed present the
traditional ruler of Awka (variously called the "Ichie". "Eze
Uzu" or the "Obi" of Awka). Whilst the3rd defendant/appellant is
involved in overseeing that process, the role of the 1st and 2nd appellants is
mainly confined to the recognition or de-recognition of the person duly
nominated, selected and presented to them for recognition, pursuant to the provisions
of the Traditional Rulers Law No.14 of 1981 of Anambra State. It is admitted by
all the parties concerned that the process of nomination to presentation was
governed until disagreements arose by the 1976 Chieftaincy Constitution for
Awka Community. It is the contention of the plaintiffs/respondents that
sometime in 1985 the 4th and 5th defendants/appellants "and their group
"unilaterally amended that Constitution, and proceeded to select, instal
and purported to present an "unpopular candidate" for recognition as
the traditional ruler of Awka. Incensed by this action the
plaintiffs/respondents filed an action (Suit No. AA/70/86) in the High Court of
Anambra State (Awka Division) claiming:- "1. A declaration that any
constitution purported to be an amendment to the 1976 Chieftaincy Constitution
for Awka Community and lodged with the Administrator for Awka or forwarded to
the Anambra State Commissioner for Local Government, Rural Development and
Chieftaincy Matters Enugu is null and void and of no effect: 2. A declaration
that any action or decision based on the purported amendment of the Chieftaincy
Constitution for Awka of 1976 is null and void and of no effect; 3. A
declaration that the 4th defendant has no power either by custom tradition or
any known law to act as the regent or Ichie of Awka and that the purported
appointment of the 4th defendant as the regent or Ichie of Awka by the 3rd
defendant or any other person or persons or body is null and void and is of no
effect; 4. An injunction to restrain the 1st and 2nd defendants from acting on
any decision based on the purported amendment of the 1976 Awka Constitution; 5.
An injunction to restrain the 4th defendant from parading himself as the regent
of Awka; 6. A further injunction to restrain the 5th defendant from presenting
himself to the 1st and 2nd defendants as the person validly selected under the
purported amended 1976 Awka Chieftaincy Constitution to represent the Awka
Community." After the plaintiffs/respondents had filed their pleadings
both the 1st to 3rd defendants/appellants and the 4th and 5th
defendants/appellants thereafter separately filed motions in the same Division
of the Anambra State High Court for an order of the High Court dismissing the
action filed, on the ground that the plaintiffs/respondents had no locus standi
to institute the action. The order sought was granted by the trial Judge in a
reserved judgment delivered on 15/12/86. On the same day the
plaintiffs/respondents filed an appeal against the ruling to the Court or Appeal
and a motion seeking a stay of execution of the judgment of the High Court
appealed against. The stay sought was refused by the High Court in its
considered ruling on 17/3/87. On 6/2/87, before the High Court ruled on the
application for a stay, the 1st to 3rd defendants/appellants, in exercise of
their powers under Law No.14 of 1981 aforementioned, granted recognition to the
5th defendant/appellant as the Obi of Awka. The plaintiffs/respondents,
according to them "in desperation", filed a fresh action in the Enugu
Division of the Anambra High Court seeking declaration that the
"purported" recognition of the 5th defendant/appellant as the Obi
(Eze Uzu) of Awka is illegal, void and "is of no effect", that the
5th defendant/appellant was not validly elected and an order of perpetual
injunction restraining the 1st to 3rd defendants/appellants, their agents,
servants etc. from giving a certificate of recognition to the 5th defendant or
"in any way treating him as the traditional ruler of Awka." This
action was transferred to the Akwa Division for hearing. As at the stage when
the 1st to 3rd defendants/appellants recognized the 5th defendant/appellant as
the Obi of Awka what was in the Courts by way of litigation was an appeal
against the ruling/judgment that the plaintiffs/respondents had no locus standi
to institute the original action (Suit No. AA/70/86), the substantive action
having been dismissed. By another motion filed on 17/3/87 in the Court of
Appeal (Enugu Division), and numbered CA/E/74M/87, the plaintiffs/ respondents
prayed for the following orders - "(a) a stay of the ruling/judgment or
execution in the above named suit pending the determination of the appeal (b)
an injunction to restrain the 1st and 2nd defendants/ respondents, their
servants/and or agents from acting on the said ruling to recognize the 5th
defendant/ respondent as the traditional ruler of Awka pending the
determination of the appeal." On 2/12/87, nine months after, they followed
this up with another application by way of motion filed in the same Division of
the Court of Appeal and numbered CA/E/331M/87 in which they now sought the
Court's order. "setting aside and/or revoking the recognition granted to
the 5th defendant Ozo A.C. Ndigwe as the Traditional Ruler of Awka while the
issue touching and concerning the said recognition was still pending in
Court". On 5/1/88, counsel for the 1st to 3rd defendants/appellants filed
in the Court of Appeal a notice of preliminary objection against the hearing of
the motion to set aside or revoke recognition of 5th defendant/appellant on the
grounds that - "1. The Court of Appeal has no jurisdiction to entertain by
way of a motion a matter or issue which is not pending on appeal before the
Court of Appeal but a matter pending at the High Court which has not been
determined by the High Court. 2. The Court of Appeal has no jurisdiction to
determine by way of a motion a substantive issue or a matter which will be
determined only on substantive appeal even where such a matter is pending on
appeal before the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal decided to hear both
applications of the plaintiffs/respondents and the objections of counsel for
the defendants/appellants together, and this it did on 19/1/88. On 29/2/88 the
Court delivered its considered ruling in which it held that the recognition of
the 5th defendant/respondent is null and void and of no effect and proceeded to
set it aside. It also made an order "restraining the 1st and 2nd
respondents, their servants or agents from recognizing the 5th defendant/respondent
as the traditional ruler of Awka pending the determination of this appeal"
(i.e. the appeal against the dismissal of the plaintiffs/respondents suit by
the Awka High Court). It is against this decision of the Court of Appeal that
the 1st to 3rd defendants/appellants (hereinafter called "appellants"
only) have appealed to this Court. The appellants having succeeded on most of
the issues determined, the appeal succeeded. The ruling of the Court of Appeal
appealed against, including its order setting aside the recognition accorded
the 5th appellant,was set aside. The appellants were awarded costs of the
appeal assessed at N1,000.00 only.
Post a Comment
Drop Your Opinion Here