Chief M. F. Oladipo & Ors V. Moba Local Government Authority & Ors (2009)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

JUMMAI HANNATU SANKEY, J.C.A.

The cause of action in the suit at the trial Court is the Obanla Chieftaincy of Erinmope. Whereas the lie Oji claim exclusive right to the Chieftaincy of Obanla, the lie Ibido claim that both Quaters, i.e. lie Oji and lie Ibido are entitled to ascend to the Chieftaincy. The matter of the Obanla Chieftaincy of Erinmope was mentioned as far back as 1938, where there is a record of the custom of entitlement to the stool in a document titled “Intelligence report on Out District in the Ekiti Division of the Ondo Province” written by one Mr. A. F. Abell, an Assistant District Officer. In that report, it is stated that the chieftaincy of Erinmope belongs to lie Oji. Thereafter, the issue was re-awakened and re-addressed in 1962, 1963, 1964, 1973 and 2004 by several different Panels and Commissions of Enquiries. Finally, following a Petition by the Appellants to the Government of Ekiti State, the Deputy Governor directed Moba Local Government to cause the Traditional Council to look into the matter. The Traditional Council thus invited both the Oji and Ibido Quarters through their representatives and thereafter set up a Panel to look into the matter. The PW2 however challenged the chairmanship of the Panel by the Oore of Otun on the ground that he was not friendly with the Obaleo of Erinmope and had vowed to destabilize the administration of the Obaleo. This allegation of hostility was however strongly debunked by both the Traditional Council and the Obas. Nevertheless, the PW2 was still dissatisfied with the conduct of proceedings by the Panel, alleging among other things that the evidence given by lie Ibido was not recorded, that he (PW2) was not allowed to properly cross-examine witnesses and that documents not tendered before the Panel were used in arriving at a decision. The lie Ibido yet again wrote another Petition to the Deputy Governor along these lines. In spite of all these, the Office of the Deputy Governor confirmed the report of the Panel in the Exhibit H. This is what precipitated the action at the trial Court. The Plaintiffs therein, (hereinafter referred to as the Appellants), therefore sued the Respondents at the High Court of Ekiti State sitting at Ido-Ekiti, seeking the following declarations and orders:

(a) A Declaration that the appointment or proceedings of the Panel of Enquiry set up by Moba Local Government Traditional Council to investigate the chieftaincy dispute on Obanla of Erinmope chieftaincy are unconstitutional, irregular, contrary to natural justice, null and void and therefore of no legal effect.

(b) An Order setting aside or annulling the report and or findings of the said Panel of Enquiry, the conclusions and the consequential actions of the Local Government on the report and or findings (if any).

(c) An Order of Court restraining the 1st Defendant and or other Defendants from giving any legal effect whatsoever to the report and findings of the said Panel of Enquiry or otherwise acting thereon to the prejudice of the Plaintiffs.

(d) A Declaration that there are two ruling houses to the Obanla of Erinmope Ekiti chieftaincy, namely:

(1) lie Oji (Oji quarters)

(2) lie Ibido (Ibido quarters)

(e) A Declaration that it is the turn of lie Ibido (Ibido quarters) to produce the next Obanla of Erinmope Ekiti after or at the demise of the incumbent who is from lie Oji.

(f) An Order of Court nullifying or setting aside the 1964 Otun District Council Chieftaincy Declaration and the findings and decision of the Bola Commission of Inquiry as it affects or affected the Obanla of Erinmope Chieftaincy on the ground that the Plaintiffs (Ibido Quarters) were not duly represented nor given opportunity to participate through their accredited representatives in the process and or meetings leading to the making of the declaration or decision.

(g) An Order of Court directing the 1st Defendant to, through its appropriate organ or bodies, prepare a Chieftaincy Declaration in respect of Obanla of Erinmope chieftaincy showing the two ruling houses – Oji and Ibido in tune with the instruction of the Honourable Commissioner for Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs Western State of Nigeria and which instruction was based upon the resolution of the meeting held on Friday the 24th of August, 1973.

At the close of trial, the learned trial Judge found in favour of the Respondents in these terms:

“In conclusion I hold that all the prayers sought by the Plaintiffs fails. I have dealt with it in details in this Judgment and need not repeat them. They are accordingly dismissed in its (sic) entirety.”

Aggrieved by the decision of the lower Court, the Appellants filed an Appeal comprising of six grounds. In line with the Rules of this Court, parties filed their respective Briefs of Argument. At the hearing of the Appeal on the 9th February, 2009, Counsel for the respective parties adopted their Briefs. In the Appellants’ Brief of Argument, the Appellants distilled six issues there from for determination by this Court. The 1st Respondent, in its Brief of argument, essentially adopted the 1st and 2nd issues for determination from the Brief of the 2nd & 3rd Respondents, (which was filed earlier in time). The 2nd & 3rd Respondents, on their part, formulated three issues for determination.