Alhaji Abdulkarim Iyimoga & Ors V. The Executive Governor of Plateau State & Ors (1993)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

DAHIRU MUSDAPHER, J.C.A. 

In the High Court of Justice of Plateau State holden at Lafia and in suit No. PLD/LF.6/92 which was transferred to the Jos High Court and now titled PLU/J211/92 the plaintiffs claim against the defendants are in these terms:-

“(a) A declaration that the Benue Plateau State of Nigeria Gazette No. 47 Vol. 6 of 23rd November, 1972 supplement part E (B.P.S.L.A.L.N. 27 of 1972) as promulgated is in conformity with the Native Law, Custom, Tradition and Unwritten Constitution of Doma People.

(b) A declaration that there are only three Ruling Houses/Dynasties, to wit, Obushugu (Odogyo), Inumakwe (Asibiri), and Ayigogah (Odorogya), known to the custom, tradition and unwritten constitution of Doma people and that only male descendants of these Ruling Houses/Dynasties are eligible to become the Andoma of Doma.

(c) An order directing the defendants to set in motion with immediate effect the machinery for the selection and installation of a new Andoma of Doma in accordance with the relevant law.

(d) An order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, their agents or privies from tempering in any way whatsoever with the said law as same was arrived at with the consent of all the Royal Houses in Doma after due deliberation, or, and consideration of the Native law and Custom of the Doma people.”

Both the Writ of summons and the statement of Claim were served on the two defendants on the 30th day of April, 1992. While the case is still pending, the first defendant, the Governor of plateau state appointed a Judicial panel of Inquiry to look into the vacant stool of the Andoma of Doma with the following Terms of Reference:-

“1. To examine from available records and history and thereafter to confirm the correct number of Ruling Houses that are eligible to be selected for the throne of the Andoma of Doma.

2. To examine existing methods of selection of Andoma of Doma and identify any anomaly (if any) and make appropriate recommendations with the new of lasting solution.
3. To make any other recommendations that may help to stabilise and sustain the Electoral College of the Andoma of Doma.”

The Judicial Panel was appointed on the 10th day of June, 1992, during the pendency of the plaintiff’s case against the two defendants aforesaid. The plaintiffs felt aggrieved with the action of the 1st defendant in instituting the Judicial Panel while their claims which are similar in nature are pending before the court. On the 16th day of June, 1992, the plaintiffs filed a move before the High Court praying that the Judicial Panel be restrained by an injunction from conducting the Inquiry. The members of the Judicial Panel, Counsel and the secretary were made parties to the motion and they are herein the 3rd to the 7th Respondents. To be precise, the terms of the motion filed by the plaintiffs are as follows:-

“1. An Order restraining the 3rd – 7th Respondents being agents of the 1st and 2nd Respondents from sitting as a Judicial Panel of Inquiry on the stool of the Andoma of Domain Doma Local Government Area.

2. An order restraining the 1st and 2nd Respondents and their agents whosoever from doing anything whatsoever in relation to the chieftaincy stool of the Andoma of Doma till the final determination of the substantive suit pending before this Court.
3. An Order restraining the 1st and 2nd Respondents and their agents from tempering with the Benue Plateau State of Nigeria Gazette No. 47 Vol. 6 of 23rd November, 1972 Supplement Part E (B.P.S.L.A.L.N. 27 of 1972).
4. An order granting an accelerated hearing of the substantive suit.
5. Such further or other orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstances.”

The motion was supported with an affidavit of 19 paragraphs. There was also a further affidavit of eight paragraphs. Unfortunately the respondents to the motion did not file any counter-affidavit. The learned trial judge Uloko CJ heard oral arguments and in his ruling delivered on the 31/7/1992 refused the application.

In part of his ruling he held as follows:

“on the materials placed before me, I have no doubt at all in my mind that the applicants have a triable issue before me. This is not being contested by the respondents.

With regards to the question posed by the learned counsel for the applicants as to whether or not, it is permissible for a party to a suit to engage in self help gimmicks to out-manoeuver the other party, the answer is definately no. No court of law will fold its arms, sit and watch, in utter helplessness, its judicial powers being benumbed for whatever reason, through administrative process…”