Chief James Molegbemi & Ors V. Chief Amos Ajayi & Ors (2011)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

HARUNA MOH’D TSAMMANI, J.C.A.(Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of C.A. Akintayo J. of the Ekiti state High court sitting at Ado-Ekiti delivered on the 31st day of March, 2008 wherein he granted all the reliefs sought by the 1st and 2nd Respondents, who were Plaintiffs at the lower court. The 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th Respondents in this appeal were the 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th and 11th Defendants at the lower court.

From the record of appeal, the claim of the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs (1st and 2nd Respondents) as contained in their statement of claim is as contained in paragraph 50 of the statement of claim. Therein, they claimed as follows:

1. Declaration that under the Customary Law regulating appointment of the Owa of Oke Ako Chieftaincy, there are two Ruling Houses for the chieftaincy the identity of which are Aofin and Okediosan Ruling Houses.
2. Declaration that upon the demise of the late Oba J.O. Ogunbiyi from Okediosan Ruling House in December, 2000, it is the turn of Aofin Ruling House to nominate a candidate or candidates for the vacant stool of Owa of Oke Ako.
3. Declaration that the Aofin Ruling House of Oke Ako is made up of three families namely Oke Aofin, Odo Aofin and Afata and none of these families constitutes a separate or distinct Ruling House.
4. Declaration that under the existing Customary Law regulating appointment of an-Owa of Oke Ako, All adult male member (sic) of Aofin Ruling House from all the three families of Oke Odo Aofin and Afata constituting the Ruling House are eligible for consideration when it is the turn of Aofin Ruling House to ascend the throne.
5. Declaration that upon the demise of Oba J.O. Ogunbiyi from Okediosan Ruling House, the right to present the next Owa of Oke Ako had become vested in the Aofin Ruling House as a unit and no amendment can be made to the Customary Law or declaration to divest the Aofin Ruling House of that right.
6. Declaration that the Recommendations of the Ikole Local Government Traditional Council for the position of Owa of Oke Ako to rotate between Afata and Okediosan Ruling Houses is perverse, unconstitutional, contrary to the rules of natural justice, and at variance with the custom and tradition regulating selection of Owa of Oke Ako.
7. Injunction restraining the Defendants jointly and/or severally from implementing the recommendations of the Ikole Local Government Traditional Council for recognition of Afata and Okediosan as the two Ruling Houses for the Owa of Oke Ako Chieftaincy to the exclusion of the Oke Aofin family.

Injunction restraining the Defendants jointly and/or severally from treating Afata Ruling House as a Ruling House for the Owa of Oke-Ako Chieftaincy or calling upon Afata family to present a candidate to the exclusion of other members of Aofin Ruling House.

The 1st Respondent is the head of the Oke-Aofin family, one of the three families constituting the Aofin Ruling House, while the 2nd Respondent is the member of the Aofin Ruling House interested in contesting the stool of Owa of Oke-Ako. The 1st Appellant is the head of the Afata family while the 2nd Appellant was the candidate nominated to contest for the throne of Owa of Oke-Ako by the Afata family.

Briefly, the 1st and 2nd Respondents’ case at the lower court is that, there are two Ruling Houses in Oke Ako, to wit: Aofin Ruling House and Okediosan Ruling House and that it is the custom in Oke Ako that ascension to the throne of Owa of Ake Ako alternates between the two Ruling Houses.

That this practice was established by the recommendations of Justice Oluwole chieftaincy Review commission and accepted by the Government vide a white Paper. That the last Owa who was from the Okediosan Ruling House died in December, 2000 and thus it became the turn of the Aofin Ruling House to produce the Owa and in accordance with that custom, two members of the Aofin Ruling House showed interest in contesting for the vacant stool; to wit: the 2nd Appellant and the 2nd Respondent. The 2nd Appellant is from the Afata Section of the Ruling House while the 2nd Respondent is from Oke Aofin.

It is also their case that, as custom demands, the 1st Appellant as head of the Ruling House, had the duty to summon a meeting of all the members of the Ruling House to decide on which of the two candidates who had shown interest is to be presented to the Kingmakers, failed to call such meeting, but presented only the name of the 2nd Appellant as the sole candidate for consideration by the Kingmakers. That the Kingmakers comprising the 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th Respondents, being aware of the interest of the 2nd Respondent insisted that all male members of the Aofin Ruling House are eligible to contest and that the 1st Appellant should forward the names of all persons who had shown interest for consideration. This action of the Kingmakers ignited a series of petitions to the Traditional council of the Ikole Local Government, which set up a 3 man committee headed by Oba J.F. Ala, the Owa of Oke-Aiyedun. That the Committee took memoranda from interested members of the public, heard oral evidence and subsequently recommended that all male members of the Aofin Ruling House, from whichever branch of the House was eligible to contest for the throne of Owa of Oke-Ako. That the Afata family who were not pleased with that recommendation petitioned the Ikole Local Government Traditional council and that the council without hearing any of the parties upturned the Oba J. Ala’s committee Report and decided that only the 1st and 2nd Appellants’ Afata family can produce a candidate for the Owa of Oke Ako stool when it is the turn of the Aofin Ruling House to present a candidate. Dissatisfied, the 1st and 2nd Respondents took up a writ of summons in the High court of Ekiti State and sought the reliefs as earlier reproduced in this Judgment.

The position of the Appellants is that, while they agree that it is the turn of the Aofin Ruling House to produce the next Owa of Oke-Ako, it is only their Afata family of the three families comprising the Aofin Ruling House, that can present a candidate for the Owa of Oke-Ako stool to the exclusion of the other two families of Oke-Aofin and Odo-Aofin. That it has always been the Afata family that produce candidates for the stool, while the other two families have been producing Kingmakers.

At the trial before the lower court, evidence was led on behalf of the parties and several documents tendered and admitted as exhibits. At the close of evidence, the parties filed written Addresses and the matter adjourned for judgment. In a considered judgment delivered on the 31st day of March, 2008, the learned trial judge gave judgment for the plaintiffs and granted all the reliefs sought by them. The 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Defendants (now Appellants) are dissatisfied with the judgment of the lower court and have thus filed this appeal consisting of eight grounds of Appeal vide Notice of Appeal dated 21/15/2008 and filed on the 22/5/2008.

The grounds of Appeal without their particulars, are as follows:

(1) The lower court erred in law when it held thus:

“I declare that under the customary law regulating appointment and (sic) of Oke-Ako, all adult male members of the Aofin Ruling house are eligible for nomination, selection and appointment to the Awo of Oke Ako Chieftaincy stool.”

2. The lower court misdirected itself in law when it held thus:

“As I have held earlier, the position of the government white paper on the Oluwole’s Chieftaincy Review Committee is that there is Aofin ruling house in Oke Ako.