Attorney-general and Commissioner for Justice, Ekiti State & Ors. V. Prince James Lagunju Osho (2000)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

AMAIZU, J.C.A. 

This is a motion on notice praying the court for the following reliefs –

“1. Extension of time within which to ask for leave of this court to appeal against the judgment of the lower court delivered by Honourable Justice J. O. Akinyede of the Ikole High Court on the 17th day of March, 1998, as an interested party to the subsisting appeal herein.

2. Leave to appeal against the judgment of the lower court as an interested party, that is, the 9th appellant.
3. Enlargement of time within which the applicant should file and serve his notice of appeal.
4. An order deeming the already filed and served notice of appeal herein attached as properly filed and served.
5. Leave for continuance of stay of execution granted in the lower court against the judgment delivered by Hon. Justice J. A. Akinyede (now rtd.) on 17th March, 1998, the subject matter of this appeal. And for such further order or other orders as this Honourable court may deem fit to make in the circumstances.”

The application was supported by an affidavit of twenty paragraphs, and also a further affidavit.

It is necessary, in my considered view to give a brief narrative of the facts which constitute the back drop to this application.

The stool of Atta of Aiye Ekiti Chieftaincy became vacant some time in 1991. There is only one ruling house qualified to contest for the stool. Initially, the plaintiff now the respondent and three other princes indicated their intention to contest for the stool. Later, the number increased to seven.

One Ezekiel Agbetayo, the Eleberi for the ruling house refused to forward the names of those who indicated their intention to contest to the kingmakers. The meeting of the ruling house scheduled to hold in connection with the selection at Atta Hall on 12/11/91 was aborted by the said Eleberi.

The Oye Local Government later wrote the Eleberi to forward all the names of those who were contesting to the kingmakers. The Eleberi refused. Eventually he forwarded the name of one of the contestants to the king makers. The Kingmakers refused to act on the name of the lone candidate and asked for names of other princes who were contesting for the stool. Several meetings were held to resolve the dispute. The Kingmakers insisted on the names of all the contestants being sent to them in accordance with the White paper on the Report of Morgan’s Commission of Enquiry. The ruling house warned the Oye Local Government against imposition of a particular candidate on the town.

When the government mooted the idea of appointing warrant chiefs, there were protests against the proposed appointments. The warrant chiefs were eventually appointed. They met and appointed the applicant as the Atta of Aiyede-Ekiti. It was in the process of appointing the applicant that the respondent brought an action against the Attorney-General & Commissioner for Justice, Ekiti State, the Secretary, Oye Local Government and the eight warrant chiefs appointed by the Government.

The further amended writ of summons dated 2nd day of October, 1997, filed by the respondent contained the endorsements of the respondent’s claims as follows:-

“The plaintiff’s claim is against the defendants jointly and severally for:-

(a) A declaration that the appointment of the third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth defendants as warrant chiefs in Aiyede-Ekiti on 30th December, 1992 by the first defendant is contrary to the provisions of the Chiefs Law and Declaration of Atta of Aiyede Chieftaincy and therefore, illegal, wrongful, unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect whatsoever.

(b) An injunction restraining the third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh and eight defendants from parading themselves or doing any act as warrant chiefs in Aiyede-Ekiti or taking any part or aiding any person in the process of selecting a new candidate for the Atta of Aiyede Chieftaincy.

(c) An order of this Honourable Court setting aside all the actions already taken by the third to eight defendants towards the selection and or appointment of a new candidate for the vacant stool of Atta of Aiyede.”