Chief Michael Elobisi & Ors V. Professor Ronald O. Onyeonwu & Ors (1989)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

UWAIFO, J.C.A.

On 17th March, 1989, at the Otuocha High Court, Achi-Kanu, J., made restraining orders against the defendants/applicants. I shall state the form and extent of the orders presently but before then I intend to narrate briefly what circumstances seemed to have warranted the said orders as perceived by the learned Judge.

The plaintiffs /respondents are members of the Ogbunike Progress Union, a social organisation in Ogbunike Community. The Union appears to be the live organ and planning body of the community. Its management was recently taken over by persons regarded by the plaintiffs/respondents and other members of the Union as enlightened persons. The community built a town hall and market from which fees and stallage are collected by the Union on behalf of the community. The defendants/applicants are members of the community but are said to be antagonistic towards the management of the Union, having lost control of the said Union. The other members of the Union regard the defendants/applicants as reactionary and believing in fetish. The said management is at present a caretaker committee which took over the affairs of the Union following the dissolution of the Executive. The community of Ogbunike was on 26 December, 1988, said to have passed a vote of confidence in the caretaker committee. But on 2 January, 1989, the defendants/applicants were alleged to have made an unsuccessful attempt to pass a vote of no confidence in the said committee.

Thereafter the defendants/applicants were said to have met at the Palace of the Igwe of the town and taken the following resolutions:

(a) That all the members of the Union’s caretaker committee returned unopposed on 26 December, 1988 are ostracised.

(b) That the said caretaker committee is dissolved.

(c) That the administration and management of the affairs of the town is now vested in the Ndichies (a group of chiefs to which the defendants/applicants belong).

(d) That there shall be no more collection of fees from the Oye-olisa market and the town hall till further notice.

(e) That the decisions shall be announced at the said market that same day.

The defendants/applicants were said to have accordingly gone to the market, made the announcement and stopped all the revenue collectors and the market master from performing their work. In addition to the above, the defendants/applicants were accused of threatening to bring deaths and misfortune to the community by invoking the spirit of a shrine known as Anashrine and of the founder of the town through the fetish ritual known as Isu akpulalo. It was also feared that the defendants/applicants would resort to the swearing on an idol known as inu iyi and the use of enweaka masquerade considered to have dreadful consequences.

The plaintiffs/respondents (as applicants in the court below) filed a motion ex-parte on 16 January 1989, which the learned Judge fixed for 26th January, 1989, for what they called “an order of interim injunction” to restrain the defendants. On the said 26 January, the Judge ordered that the ex-parte motion together with the affidavits and exhibits in support be served on the defendants who were to appear in court on 2nd February, 1989 to show cause why the order sought by the plaintiffs should not be made. But before 26 January, the plaintiffs had on 18th January, 1989 filed another motion, this time on notice, to the same effect as the motion ex-parte, and this was fixed for 10th February, 1989. Both motions asked for an order restraining the defendants “pending the determination of the main suit.”

As it turned out, the motion on notice was not actually heard. But there were affidavits, further affidavits, counter-affidavits and further counter-affidavits filed by the parties. It appears that counsel for the parties were compelled to advance arguments before the court on 17th March, 1989 when the learned Judge could no longer accommodate further adjournment. The court reached a decision that same day. The learned Judge remarked inter alia:

“I know from records that this motion has suffered from inordinate delays. I also know that the plaintiffs/applicants’ counsel had contributed to that inordinate delays. But that is not the issue now: The issue is why should the court appear to be under spell and fold its hands when the further affidavits continue to depict image of growing animosity and consternation in the Ogbunike Community; such that if the court does not act swiftly the mischiefs alleged as being threatened will explode I grant the plaintiffs/applicants’ prayers and the order absolute. The court had called upon the respondents to show cause why the applicants’ prayers should not be granted. This was in effect an order nisi.”

The learned Judge then said that the delay tended to impede the court from acting timeously but that it would not shirk its duty. He then in that situation decreed: