From Our Correspondent
Federal High Court sitting in Kano has ruled that it has the jurisdiction to preside over the case of human rights violation filed by deposed Emir Aminu Ado Bayero, and a senior councillor, Aminu Babba DanAgundi.
The deposed emir had filed a case of violation of his rights, following the reinstatement of Emir Mohammadu Sanusi II by Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf.
The court had granted an ex-parte order stopping Governor Yusuf from reinstating Sanusi, pending the determination of a substantive suit filed against his reinstatement.
The order also kicked against the abolishment of the four emirates of Bichi, Gaya, Karaye and Ran, following a bill earlier passed by the House of Assembly.
It directed all parties involved to maintain status quo ante, pending the determination of the suit filed by Sarkin Dawaki Babba and Aminu Babba-Dan’Agundi.
Justice Liman granted leave to the plaintiff to serve their concurrent originating motion, as well as other court processes on the sixth defendant (Inspector-General of Police, IGP) in the Federal Capital Territory, FCT, outside the jurisdiction of the court.
Other defendants in the suit are the Kano State government, Kano State House of Assembly, speaker of the Assembly, Commissioner of Police, Nigerian Security and Civil Defence Corps, NSCDC, and the Department of State Security, DSS.
Justice Liman ordered all parties to maintain status quo ante in the passage and assent of the bill.
“That parties are hereby ordered to maintain status quo ante pending hearing of the fundamental rights application.
“In view of the constitutional and jurisdictional issues apparent on the face of the application, parties shall address the court on same at the hearing of the fundamental rights application.
“That in order to maintain the peace and security of the state, an interim injunction is granted restraining the respondents from enforcing, executing, implementing and operationalising the Kano State Emirate Law Council (Repeal) Law.
“That parties are hereby ordered to maintain status quo ante on the passage and assent of the bill into law, pending the hearing of the fundamental rights application.”
However, when the case resumed yesterday, Justice Liman, relying on Section 42 Sub-section 1 of the Constitution, said the court had powers of jurisdiction to hear the case.
The judge noted, “What I find intriguing is the respondents’ total reliance on the case of Gongola, whereas Section 42 Sub-section 1 of the Constitution has clearly spelt out the jurisdictional powers of the Federal High Court to preside over such cases.
“My respectful view is that the case of Tukur against Gongola is indistinguishable with the present case. Section 42 Sub-section 1 and Section 32 of the Constitution have vested powers in our court to decide on this matter.”
In continuation of the case, the plaintiff’s counsel, Barrister Chukwuson Ojukwu, argued that the matter is ripe for hearing on the main issues of the invalidity of the reappointment of a new emir and the deposition of the 15th Emir, Bayero.
But Barrister A.G Wakil insisted that the new motion seeking to continue hearing on chieftaincy affairs issues was not part of the original summons and it is a different application outside the matter of human rights violation and the jurisdictional powers of the court, which it had decided.
The judge explained that the matter was adjourned to Thursday, June 13 for only ruling and nothing else.
Justice Liman thereafter adjourned the case to June 14, noting that the matter was too sensitive to linger.
