Chief Yakubu Sanni V. Okene Local Government & Anor (2005)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

RHODES-VIVOUR, J.C.A.

The proceedings leading to this appeal were initiated in the High Court of Kogi State, holden at Okene on the 20th day of November, 2001. In that court, the appellant as plaintiff claimed against the respondents, then defendants, by way of writ of summons accompanied by statement of claim as follows:

1. A declaration that the purported letter of the defendants dated the 19th of January, 1998, addressed to the plaintiff removing him as a member of the 1st defendant is unconstitutional, illegal, an abuse of power, null and void and of no effect.
2. An Order that since the plaintiff was not appointed by the defendants jointly and severally, having been appointed by the Kogi State Government of Nigeria vide a letter dated the 17th day of July, 1995, it is only the Kogi State Government of Nigeria that can remove the plaintiff by virtue of the Kogi State Chiefs Appointment Deposition and Establishment of Traditional Council Law 1992.
3. An Order that the plaintiff is still a member of the Okene Local Government Traditional council and therefore, entitled to all the benefits attached to that office.
4. An injunction restraining the defendants jointly and severally, their servants, agents and privies from further embarrassing, inconveniencing the plaintiff as a member representing Edo-Uneme Community in Ebiraland in the Okene Local Government Traditional Council.
5. Claiming the sum of N100,000, being general damages for the embarrassment, inconvenience, financial loss, physiological pains (sic) the act of the defendants jointly and severally has caused the plaintiff.

In paragraph 5 of the statement of claim, the plaintiff deposed that he was appointed as a member of the Okene Local Government Traditional Council in a letter dated the 17th of July, 1995 by the Kogi State Government of Nigeria. According to the plaintiff, he was removed from the Okene Local Government by a letter dated the 19th of January, 1998.

It is as a result of his removal that the plaintiff instituted the action against the defendants jointly and severally as aforesaid.

The defendants filed a joint statement of defence and pleaded in paragraph 2(a) as follows:

“2. The defendants shall at or before the trial of this suit raise by way of objection on point of law, the following matters, that is to say –

(a) the action is statute-barred and is not maintainable by virtue of Section 2(a) of the Public officers (Protection) Law, Cap 111 of the Laws of Northern Nigeria 1963, as applicable in Kogi State.

On the 9th of October, 2001, the defendants filed a formal motion on Notice under Order 24 rules 2 and 3 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules of Kogi State 1991. The application was founded on the provisions of Section 2(a) of the Public Officers (Protection) Law Cap 111 of the Laws of Northern Nigeria 1963, as applicable in Kogi State.

After hearing arguments, the learned trial Judge in a considered ruling delivered on the 20th of November, 2001 dismissed the plaintiff’s action on the sole ground that the action is statute-barred, it being caught by the provisions of the Public Officers (Protection) Law 1963.

Aggrieved by the ruling of the Kogi State High Court the plaintiff has appealed to this court. I shall hereinafter refer to the plaintiff and the defendants in this ruling as the appellant and the respondents respectively.

In accordance with the rules of this court, the appellant, through his learned Counsel filed his brief of argument on the 11th day of October, 2004. The respondents duly filed their joint brief of argument on the 21st day of March, 2005, after obtaining the leave of Court to file it out of time.

In the appellant’s brief of argument, the following two issues are identified as arising for determination in this appeal, namely:

“1. Even though the Learned trial Judge held that she could not determine at the interlocutory stage whether or not, the defendants acted outside the colour of their office or outside their statutory or constitutional duties, whether the learned trial Judge was right to have nonetheless, proceeded to dismiss the action on the basis of the Public Officers (Protection) Law as applicable in Kogi State.

2. Whether the learned trial Judge was right in holding that the defendants are protected by Section 2(a) of the Public Officers (Protection) Law, Chapter 111 of the Laws of Northern Nigeria, 1963 as applicable in Kogi State.”

The respondents submitted a sole issue for determination, to wit: