The Attorney-general Of Plateau State & Ors V. Hon. Chief Anthony Goyol & Ors (2007)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

AKAAHS, J.C.A.

The plaintiffs now respondents took out an originating summons seeking a determination of the following questions: –

1. Whether the plaintiffs’ tenure of office is determinable under the Plateau State Local Government Law No. 1 of 1999 under which they were elected and sworn in or determinable under a succeeding version of the Local Government Law of Plateau State.
2. Whether being elected and sworn in under the Plateau State Local Government Law No. 1 of 1999, the three-year term of office of the plaintiffs Local Government Chairmen became extinguished under the Plateau State Local Government Council Law 2007 signed into law on 12th January, 2007 by the 2nd defendant.
3. Whether the tenure of office of the plaintiffs elected Local Government Chairmen inaugurated on 20th April, 2004, under the Plateau State Local Government Law No. 1 of 1999 has lapsed.
4. Whether in view of answers to question Nos. 1, 2, and 3 above, the act of the 2nd defendant in unilaterally terminating the plaintiffs’ term of office on 12th January, 2007 is not undemocratic, unconstitutional, unlawful, illegal, null and void.
5. Whether in view of answers to question Nos. 1, 2 and 3 above, the 2nd defendant can lawfully appoint Sole Administrators or interim or transitional administrations to replace the plaintiffs in respect of Plateau State Local Government Chairmanship seats before the expiration of the plaintiffs three-year term of office.
6. Whether in view of the answers to question Nos. 1, 2 and 3 above, the 2nd defendant can lawfully confirm the appointment of Sole Administrators or interim or transitional administrations to replace the plaintiffs in respect of Local Government chairmanship seats of Plateau State before the expiration of their three-year term of office.
7. Whether in view of answers to question Nos. 1, 2 and 3 above the 4th defendant can lawfully conduct fresh elections into the Local Government Chairmanship seats occupied by the plaintiff’s with a view to replacing the Plaintiffs before the expiration of their term of office.
8. Whether in view of answers to question Nos. 2 and 3 above, it would be lawful for the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants to do anything or continue with any act or make any pronouncement or take any step or otherwise act in any manner that will terminate or have the effect of terminating the plaintiffs’ three-year term of office before the expiration.

And the Plaintiffs seek the following reliefs; –

1. A declaration that the plaintiffs’ tenure of office IS ONLY determinable under the Plateau State Local Government Law No.1 of 1999 under which they were elected and sworn in AND NOT under a succeeding version of the Local Government Law of Plateau State.
2. A declaration that being elected and sworn in under the Plateau State Local Government Law No.1 of 1999 the three-year term of office of the plaintiffs Local Government Chairmen HAS NOT become extinguished under the Plateau State Local Government Council Law 2007 signed into law on 12th January, 2007 by the 2nd defendant.
3. A declaration that the tenure of office of the plaintiffs elected Local Government Chairmen inaugurated on 20th April, 2004 under the Plateau State Local Government Law No. 1 of 1999 HAS NOT otherwise expired.
4. A declaration that the act of the 2nd defendant in unilaterally terminating the plaintiffs’ term of office on 12th January, 2007 is undemocratic, unconstitutional, unlawful, illegal, null and void.
5. A declaration that the 2nd defendant cannot lawfully appoint Sole Administrators or interim or transitional administrations to replace the plaintiffs in respect of Plateau State Local Government Chairmanship seats before the expiration of the plaintiffs three-year term of office.
6. A declaration that the 3rd defendant cannot lawfully confirm the appointment of Sole Administrators or interim or transitional administrations to replace the plaintiffs in respect of Local Government Chairmanship seats of Plateau State before the expiration of their three-year term of office.
7. A declaration that the 4th defendant cannot lawfully conduct fresh elections into the Local Government Chairmanship seats occupied by the plaintiffs with a view to replacing the plaintiffs before the expiration of their term of office.
8. A declaration that it would be unlawful for the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants to do anything or continue with any act or make any pronouncement or take any step or otherwise act in any manner that will terminate or have the effect of terminating the plaintiffs’ three-year term of office before its expiration.
9. An order reinstating the plaintiffs forthwith to their respective position as Local Government Chairmen in Plateau State.
10. An order of perpetual injunction restraining the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants whether by themselves, their servants, agents and privies, from doing anything or continuing with any act or making any pronouncement or taking any step whatsoever or otherwise acting in any manner that will terminate or have the effect of terminating the plaintiffs’ three-year term of office before its expiration on 19th April, 2007.

The grounds upon which the reliefs’ are sought are as follows:

1. Section 7, Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria provides for a system of a Local Government by democratically elected councils.
2. Having been elected and sworn in under the Plateau State Local Government Law No. 1 of 1999, the plaintiffs’ tenure of office as Local Government Chairmen is only determinable under the provisions of the law.
3. Having been sworn in on 20th April, 2004, the plaintiffs’ three-year tenure of office will expire on 19th April, 2007.
4. The 2nd defendant lacks the power to remove the plaintiffs from office by fiat before the expiration of their three-year term of office.

The summons was supported with a 16 paragraph affidavit which was deposed to by Dr. Hitler F. Dadi, the 13th plaintiff on behalf of himself and the 2nd -16th plaintiffs wherein he averred in paragraphs 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 of the affidavit as follows:-

“8. The plaintiffs were elected Local Government Chairmen in March 2004 under the Plateau State Local Government Law No. 1 of 1999 and inaugurated on 20th April, 2004 for a three-year tenure, which will expire on 19th April, 2007.

9. The 3rd defendant passed a new bill entitled Local Government Council Bill 2007, which was signed into law by the 2nd defendant on 12th January, 2007.
10. On the said 12th January, 2007, the 2nd defendant purporting to act under the new law dissolved the Councils constituted by the 16 plaintiffs whose tenure of office will expire on 19th April, 2007.
11. Under the law upon which the 16 plaintiffs were elected and took their oath of office as Council Chairmen on 20th April, 2004, their tenure of office is three years, which is due to terminate on 19th April, 2007.
12. Notwithstanding the above fact, on 12th January, 2007 the 2nd defendant dissolved the democratically elected Local Government councils under the chairmanship of the plaintiffs and removing the plaintiffs from their elected positions before the expiration of their term of office.
13. I verily believe the 2nd defendant has now perfected plans to reconstitute the Local Councils in Plateau State by conduct of fresh elections into the councils by the 4th defendant, or by simply appointing other persons into the councils to replace the plaintiffs whose tenure of office has not expired.
14. I verily believe the 2nd defendant will soon swear in or cause to be sworn in such newly elected or newly appointed persons into the Plateau State Local Government Councils to replace the plaintiffs before the expiration of their tenure in office.
15. I verily believe the Local Government Councils in Plateau State are not due for reconstitution until 19th April, 2007.”

The memorandum of appearance was filed on behalf of 1st and 2nd defendants on 16th January, 2007 and on 18th January, 2007. One Sati Zakka, the Litigation Secretary in the Chambers of the Hon. Attorney-General Plateau State deposed to a 5 paragraph counter-affidavit and averred in paragraphs 3 and 4 thereof that –

“3. That L.I. Walle of counsel informed me in the chambers of the Attorney-General on 16/1/2007 at about 9:00am and I verily believed him as follows. –

(a) That the applicants were Chairmen of 16 Local Government Councils in the State.

(b) That the 3rd defendant repealed the Local Government Councils Law No.1 of 1999 in 2005 and (sic) its place enacted a new Local Government Council Law 2005. That the Local Government Councils Law 2005 was repealed in 2006 and a new Local Government Councils law 2006 was enacted.

(c) That by the repeal, the 2nd defendant is empowered to dissolve the applicants preparatory to elections.

(d) That the 2nd defendant in the exercise of his powers under the said law dissolved the applicants on the 12th/1/2007.

4. That it will be in the interest of justice to refuse this application.”

This counter-affidavit must have been filed sequel to the ex-parte motion as well as motion on notice which plaintiffs filed along with the originating summons seeking four injunctive reliefs.

The 1st and 2nd defendants later filed an application dated 17th January, 2007 praying for an order discharging paragraph 1 of the ex-parte order dated the 15th January, 2007 on the ground that the court was misled. After filing the memorandum of appearance on behalf of 3rd and 4th defendants on 19/1/2007, Solomon Umoh, of counsel filed a motion on notice seeking to set aside the ex-parte order which the court had made on 15/1/2007 for lack of jurisdiction in the following terms: –