Chief Emimigbe Omokhafe & Ors V The Military Administrator Edo State Of Nigeria & Ors (2004)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

KATSINA-ALU, JSC 

The Plaintiffs had brought their suit at the Afuze High Court of Edo State as the representatives of “Otuo Ekheheghaki Age-Group and members of Otuo clan community except the 4th defendant and his supporters” claiming against the four respondents (herein-after referred to as the defendants) the following reliefs:

A DECLARATION that on the death of an Ovie (Ororoso) of Otuo before the expiration of his ten years tenure. No vacancy is created but his immediate deputy who is the second Enriyheha Traditional chiefs automatically ascends the throne for the unexpired term of the late Ovie (Ororoso) in accordance with Otuo Customary law regulating succession to the Traditional Ruler title of the Ovie (Ororoso) of Otuo.

A declaration that on the 19th December, 1994, Otuo Igbogbe Chieftaincy Festival appointments of the then incoming Otuo Traditional Ruler Chiefs, the 1st Plaintiff was appointed as the second Enriyheha traditional chief by Otuo kingmakers.

A declaration that on the death of the then Ovie (Ororoso) of Otuo, Chief L. B. Iraoya, on 4/9/95, the 1st plaintiff automatically succeeded him as the Ovie (Ororoso) of Otuo for his unexpired term.

A declaration that the 4th defendant, Chief Iyhejee Elugbe not being an Enriheha title holder is competent to be the Ovie (Ororoso) of Otuo in accordance with the Otuo Customary Law regulating succession to the Traditional Ruler of Ovie (Ororoso) of Otuo and the Registered Otuo Chieftaincy Declaration 1979.

A declaration that any purported recommendation of appointment of the 4th defendant as Ovie (Ororoso) of Otuo is contrary to the Otuo Customary Law regulating succession to the Traditional Ruler Title of Ovie (Ororoso) of Otuo and is therefore null and void.

An injunction restraining the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants as agents of the Edo State Government from appointing or recognizing the 4th defendant as the Ovie (Ororoso) of Otuo to succeed Late Chief L. B. Iraoya.

I intend in this judgment to make reference only to such aspects of the proceedings at the High Court which are relevant to the determination of the issues raised in this appeal.

The plaintiffs filed a statement of claim dated 14th May, 1996. The 4th defendant filed a statement of defence on 5 July 1996. In paragraph 17 of the said statement of defence, the 4th defendant pleaded:

“17. At or before the trial of this suit, the defendant will urge this Honourable Court to dismiss the plaintiffs’ action upon the following grounds:

(a) The plaintiffs have no locus standi to institute this suit.

(b) The suit discloses no cause of action.

(c) This Honourable Court has no jurisdiction to hear the suit.”