His Highness V.A. Otitoju V. Governor Of Ondo State & Ors (1994)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

KUTIGI, J.S.C.

Following the claim of the Olomuo-Oke of Omuo-Oke as the paramount Chief or Oba of Omuo-Oke, Ekiti. The Military Governor of Ondo State instituted a Judicial Commission of Inquiry headed by the Honourable Justice Ojuolape to investigate the claim. The Commission took evidence and later submitted its report to the 1st defendant herein who then issued a white paper dated August 1982. The white paper was admitted as Exhibit at the trial.

On Page 13 of Exhibit E the recommendations of the commission and the comments of the Ondo State Government were stated in part thus:

“15.0 Government views and comments on the Commission’s Recommendation:

15.1 Recommendation (i) that the claim of Olomuo-Oke as an Oba is false and should not be entertained either politically or administratively.

Comment:

Government accepts this recommendation.

15.2 Recommendation (ii) the Olomuo-Oke should be recognized as the head chief of Omuo-Oke under the paramountcy of the Olomuo who is the recognised Oba of Omuo.

Comment:

In the light of the Government’s decision on recommendation (i) above, the Olomuo-Oke will remain as the quarter head chief of Omuo-Oke quarter in Omuo under the paramountcy of the Olomuo of Omuo.”

Being aggrieved by the commission’s recommendations and the government’s comments thereon the plaintiff in the Ondo State High Court, holden at Akure, sued the defendants claiming in his writ of summons thus:

“1. A Declaration that Olomuo-Oke is the traditional and paramount ruler of Omuo-Oke Ekiti in Ondo State.

2. A Declaration that Omuo-Oke is a distinct town in Ondo State.
3. A Declaration that the findings and recommendations of Ojuolape Judicial Commission of Inquiry into the headship claim by the Olomuo-Oke of Omuo-Oke are contrary to the customary law of Omuo-Oke community and are therefore illegal and void and of no effect whatsoever.
4. A Declaration that the Ondo State Government’s views and comments on the said commission’s recommendations as contained in Ondo State of Nigeria White Paper on Ojuolape Judicial Commission of Inquiry are illegal, unconstitutional and of no effect whatsoever.
5. An Injunction restraining the Government of Ondo Sate, its servants, agents, privies and officers from acting on, executing, giving effect to or otherwise dealing with (to the detriment of the plaintiff) the said findings, recommendations, views and comments as contained in the Ondo State of Nigeria White Paper on Ojuolape Judicial Commission of Inquiry.”

Pleadings were ordered, filed and exchanged by the parties. An Amended Statement of Claim was filed by the plaintiff. The Ist and 2nd defendants also jointly filed an Amended Statement of Defence while the 3rd defendant filed his own Further Amended Statement of Defence. The case was fought on these new statements of claim and defence.

At the trial only the plaintiff testified for himself and on behalf of the people of Omuo-Oke Community. He tendered in evidence series of documentary exhibits. The defendants on the other hand called three witnesses and tendered some documents in evidence as well. From the pleadings of the parties and the evidence led, briefly stated the plaintiff’s case was that Omuo-Oke was a distinct town in Ondo State with its own paramount chief in the person of the plaintiff himself. According to the plaintiff the Western State Government in 1975 by Order published in the Gazette as Western State Legal Notice 31 of 1975. (W.S.L.N. 31 of 1975 for short) made the provisions of part II of the Chiefs Law applicable to the Olomuo-Oke of Omuo-Oke chieftaincy. By this Order the plaintiff said he became a paramount ruler of his community instead of a minor chief that he was. The Order took effect from 20th March, 1975.