Abubakar Umaru Abba Tukur Vs The Government Of Taraba State & Ors (1997)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

E. OGUNDARE, J.S.C. 

Alhaji Umam Abba Tukur, OFR was at one time the Emir of Muri. Muri was, at all times material to this case, situate in the now defunct Gongola State; it is now in Taraba State following the creation, in August 1991, of Taraba and Adamawa States out of Gongola State. He was appointed Emir of Muri on 6/11/65 in succession to his late father, Alhaji Muhammadu Tukur.

By an Order titled the Deposition (of the Emir of Muri, Alhaji Umaru Abba Tukur) Order 1986 and dated the 12th day of August 1986, the then Military Governor of Gongola State Col. Y. A. Madaki (now retired) removed Alhaji Umaru Abba Tukur (hereinafter is referred to as the appellant) from office as Emir of Muri. Before the making of the Order a letter signed by the Secretary to the Military Government of Gongola State, was forwarded to him on 11/8/86 inviting him to have audience with the Military Governor concerning the reconstitution of the dissolved Muri Emirate Council. The appellant left his palace

at Jalingo on 12/8/86 for Yola, the state capital where he met the Zonal Assistant Commissioner of Police one Alhaji Umaru Yola who took him to a residential quarters on the order of the Military Governor. It was while he was waiting in the heavily guarded quarters that the Secretary to the Government arrived and delivered to him the deposition order. Thereafter he was placed under house arrest at Yola for 32 days and on 8/9/86 he was banished and driven from Yola to Mubi in the middle of the night under tight security. Following an order of the Federal High Court sitting at Kano the plaintiff was released from detention on 16/2/87 after staying 161 days under detention in Mubi.

On 19th August 1986, he commenced proceedings in the Federal High Court Kano pursuant to section 42(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1979 and the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules 1979 praying for the following reliefs:

“1. An order or orders quashing the Deposition (of the Emir Alhaji Umaru Abba Tukur) order 1986 dated the 12th day of August, 1986, made by Col. Y. A. Madaki, Military Governor of Gongola State, removing the applicant from office as Emir of Muri, on the following grounds:

(i) That the said order violates the fundamental rights of the applicant guaranteed by section 33(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1979 as amended, (hereinafter referred to as the Constitution), in that the applicant was never given the opportunity of being heard before the said order was made, nor given any notice of misconduct pertaining thereto, let alone particulars thereto,

(ii) That the conditions precedent to the exercise of the powers of deposition by the Military Governor under section 6 of the Chiefs (Appointment and Deposition) Law Cap.20 Vol.1 Laws of Northern Nigeria 1963 applicable to Gongola State, not having been satisfied, renders the said order null and void and of no legal effect, and;

(iii) That the said order having been purportedly made pursuant to Section 1(1) (d) of Decree No. 17 of 1984, is void ab initio and not applicable to the applicant, since it cannot be said that the applicant is an employee of the Jalingo Local Government Council as envisaged by the said Decree nor could it be said that he is in the public service of Gongola State within the meaning of the said Decree, being a traditional and/or natural ruler;

2. For a declaration that by virtue of paragraphs 1 (i) to 1 (iii) supra, that the Applicant is still the Emir of Muri, Jalingo L.G.A., and is entitled to all rights and privileges pertaining thereto.
3. For a further declaration that the applicant’s detention from the 12th day of August, 1986 in a Government Lodge, Yola, by the Military Governor aforesaid is without any justifiable cause whatsoever and constitutes a further violation of his fundamental rights as enshrined in Section 32(1) of the said Constitution;
4. For another declaration that being an Emir or a traditional ruler does not derogate from the applicant’s right to freedom of movement throughout Nigeria as guaranteed by section 38(1) of the Constitution aforesaid;
5. For a perpetual injunction restraining Col. Yohanna Madaki, Military Governor of Gongola State, his servants, agents and other such representatives from howsoever interfering with the liberty and rights of the applicant, as guaranteed by chapter 4 of the said constitution except in a manner prescribed by law, and
6. For aggravated and exemplary damages against the Military Governor for wrongful infringing applicant’s fundamental rights as aforesaid; and for such other order or orders as the court may seem just.”

The proceedings went through the three tiers of courts, that is, Federal High Court, Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court on the issue of the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court to entertain the proceedings. On 5/9/89, this court, per Obaseki JSC, finally held:

“In the instant appeal, all the breaches of the fundamental rights alleged flow from the deposition of the appellant from the office of Emir of Muri by the Military Governor of the State. The office of Emir of Muri is a chieftaincy office and the deposition of the Emir a chieftaincy question which only a State High Court has jurisdiction to determine. The appellant in my opinion, is directly complaining by his claim or reliefs claimed and affidavit evidence, that his civil right as a chief has been breached and that in the process, his fundamental rights of fair hearing, liberty and freedom of movement have also been breached. His claim for an order to quash the order of deposition and restoration to the office is a relief the Federal High Court has no jurisdiction to entertain. It is only the High Court of Gongola that has jurisdiction to grant the relief. Since the Federal High Court does not have jurisdiction to quash the order of deposition and order the restoration of the appellant to his office of Emir of Muri, the jurisdiction to enforce the fundamental rights of fair hearing, liberty and movement of the appellant vests only in the High Court of Gongola State in the matter.”

See: Umaru Abba Tukur v. Government of Gongola State (No.2) (1989) 4 NWLR (Pt. 117) 517 at 547.

The learned Justice of the Supreme Court added at page 548 of the Report:

“The appellant is not without a forum to pursue his claims. He has only approached the wrong court – a court which has no jurisdiction to adjudicate on all the questions raised by the appellant.”