Nze Nathaniel Dike V. The Attorney-general And Commissioner For Justice, Imo State & Ors. (2012)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

HARUNA M. TSAMMANI, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of L.C. Alinnor, C. J. of the Imo State High Court sitting at Owerri in Suit No: HOW/33/93, delivered on the 12th day of March, 2001.

The 5th Respondent as Plaintiff in the lower court took out a writ of summons seeking inter alia, declaration that he was the person validly identified, selected, appointed, installed and presented as the Traditional Ruler or Eze of Obidiezena Autonomous Community in Ngor Mkpala Local Government Area of Imo State. He also sought for an order of court setting aside the recognition of the Appellant, who was the 6th Defendant at the trial court, by the 4th Respondent as the Eze of the said community.

At the trial, pleadings were ordered, filed and exchanged. However, in the course of trial, the parties amended their pleadings several times. The case was finally determined on the plaintiff/5th Respondent’s 3rd Amended statement of claim which was filed at the close, of evidence and addresses of counsel but before judgment. The Appellant as the 6th Defendant at the trial court fought his case on his 2nd Amended statement of Defence. The 1st and 4th Respondents also hinged their case on the basis of their Joint Amended statement of Defence while the 2nd and 3rd Respondents relied on their Joint Further Amended Statement of Defence.

It would be helpful to point out that, the subject matter of this suit is the Traditional Rulership or Ezeship stool of Obibiezena Autonomous community in Ngor Okpala Local Government Area of Imo State. The former Eze of the community, Eze J.A. Nnodi died in November, 1984. A vacancy was thus created in the stool. The evidence on record which is agreed to by all the parties is that, ascension to the throne in the community is on a rotatory basis amongst the three constituent clans or villages in the Community.

That when Eze J.A. Nnodi died, it was the turn of Emeke village to present a candidate for appointment as the Eze of the Obibiezena Autonomous Community. The issue in dispute is, who, as between the Appellant and the 6th Respondent was validly identified, selected, appointed and installed by the Obibiezena Autonomous Community as the Eze as required by the Traditional Rulers and Autonomous Communities Law No. 11 of Imo State.

The 5th Respondents case at the trial court is that, he was the person validly identified, selected, appointed and installed by the Autonomous Community as Eze sometimes in 1986 in accordance with the Instrument for the Establishment of Ezeship in Obibiezena Autonomous Community as revised in 1985. It is also his case that due to some dispute created by the Appellant, the chairman of Ngor Okpara Local Government directed that the exercise be conducted again in 1990. That he participated in the said exercise again in 1990, though as an Eze-Elect, and that his identification, selection, appointment and installation was confirmed. That after that exercise, his name was presented to the chairman of Ngor Okpala Local Government to be forwarded to the Imo state Government for recognition as required by the Traditional Rulers and Autonomous communities Law (supra).

That after he was presented to the chairman of Ngor Okpala Local Government, the Chairman duty recommended him to government for recognition as the Eze of Obibiezena. He tendered the recommendation in evidence as Exhibit “B”. He contended that the government however resorted to foot-dragging on the issue, as a result of which the Council of Chiefs in Obibiezena wrote a letter to government reminding it of the issue, but government did not reply. That instead, the Deputy Governor of Imo State directed that the issue of selection of the Eze of Obibiezena be resolved by plebiscite, but the community rejected it so the plebiscite could not hold.

It is also the 5th Respondent’s case that due to that development, he filed an application before the High Court of Imo State seeking for an order restraining government from recognizing any person as Eze Obibiezena. That before the court could rule on the application, government recognized the Appellant as the Eze and Traditional Ruler of Obibiezena. He then applied for and the Appellant was joined in the suit he had earlier filed and the court granted an order restraining the Appellant from parading himself or functioning as the Eze of Obibiezena till the determination of the matter.

The Appellant’s case as the 6th Defendant at the trial court is that, he was identified, selected, appointed and installed by the Obibiezena Autonomous Community as the Eze of the Community sometimes in 1986 pursuant to the Constitution for the Establishment of Ezeship in Obibiezena, 1976, which is the Instrument with which the last Eze was appointed. That in a contest between him and the 5th Respondent on the 28/4/86, he scored 13 votes of the electors as against the 5th Respondent’s 8 votes, and that he was subsequently declared winner. That on the 3rd May, 1986, he was presented by the Standing Committee to the Joint Assembly of Oha Obibiezena and the Obibiezena Community. That the Joint Assembly accepted and ratified his selection and passed a resolution to that effect.

He was then installed and capped in accordance with the Constitution, and subsequently issued a Certificate of Capping. He then contended that after his installation, he was presented to the Sole Administrator of Owerri Local Government on the 31/12/87 by the Obibiezena Autonomous Community together with all documents relating to his selection, appointment and installation. He denied that there was any other selection exercise on the 26/12/90 in which he participated.

It is also the Appellant’s case that, after the exercise of 26/12/90, Emeke Village wrote a protest letter to the Chairman of Ngor Okpala Local Government. That due to the exercise of 26/12/90, the Obibiezena Community wrote to government suggesting a plebiscite which government accepted.

At the close of evidence, the parties addressed the court and in a considered judgment delivered on the 12/3/2001, the learned trial Chief Judge found for the Plaintiff (5th Respondent). The Appellant being dissatisfied with that judgment has now appealed to this court vide Notice of Appeal dated the 14th day of March, 2001 and filed the same day.

The original Notice of Appeal consisted of four Grounds of Appeal and by leave of this court the Appellant filed an Amended Notice and Grounds of Appeal by incorporating four additional Grounds of Appeal. The Amended Notice and Grounds of Appeal was dated the 06/2/2003 and filed the 07/2/2003. The Grounds of Appeal, but without their particulars are as follows: