The Military Governor, Anambra State & Ors. V. Job Ezemuokwe (1997)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

L. KUTIGI, J.S.C.

The plaintiff’s claims against the defendants in the High Court are as follows: –

“1. A declaration that the plaintiff was properly and validly installed and capped the Obi or Igwe of Achina in 1959 by the people of Achina and has since enjoyed and still enjoys the popular support of the majority of Achina people.

2. A declaration that the recognition of the plaintiff as the traditional ruler of Achina by the Military Governor of Anambra State in 1977 was valid and the certificate of recognition issued to him in November 1977 proper and in accordance with law.
3. A declaration that the withdrawal of the said plaintiff’s recognition by the 1st defendant which was made public by press notice issued by the 2nd defendant on the 26th of July, 1991, without giving the plaintiff a hearing constituted a serious violation of his constitutional rights and the principles of natural justice and is therefore null and void.
4. A declaration that the 1st and/or the 2nd defendant and/or the government of Anambra State are not competent to prescribe for Achina people traditional rulership by rotation among the three

villages of Achina contrary to the traditions and the customary law of Achina and when there was no such provision in the chieftaincy constitution of the Achina community filed with the government of Anambra State and the purported prescription of rotatory rulership constitutes an abuse of power.

5. A declaration that the decision of the 1st and/or the 2nd defendant and/or the government of Anambra State that rotational rulership of Achina should commence with the village of the 4th defendant which is not the traditional “Okpala” village followed by the village of the plaintiff which is the “Okpala” village constitutes a desecration of the customs and usages of the Achina community, is ultra vires, and is not binding on the said community.
6. A declaration that no board of enquiry headed by the 5th defendant gave the members of Achina community an open opportunity of being heard on the matter the board was appointed to investigate before submitting a report to the 2nd defendant on or about 11th June, 1991.
7. A declaration that the findings of the so-called board of enquiry as stated in the press release issued by the 2nd defendant upon which the decision withdrawing recognition from the plaintiff was based amounted to an adjudication on an allegation constituting a criminal offence which infringed the Constitution of Nigeria and both the finding and the decision based thereon are null and void.
8. A declaration that as no specific charges of misconduct were laid against the plaintiff and no process was carried out by the 5th defendant to ascertain the popularity of the plaintiff his demotion from the Obi or Igwe of Achina to that of Obi of Ebele village on ground that he never enjoyed and still did not enjoy the support of Achina community is an arbitrary show of naked power, oppressive and contrary to the provisions of the Traditional Rulers Edict 1981 relating to the withdrawal of recognition of a recognised traditional ruler and therefore invalid, null and void.
9. An injunction restraining the 4th defendant from usurping/and or exercising the customary functions of the Obi of Achina.”

Meanwhile the 1st, 2nd, 3rd & 5th defendants filed a Motion on Notice praying the court:

“for an order striking out or dismissing the suit on the ground that the court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit on the ground that the notice of intention to sue required to be serve on the 1st

defendant under the Traditional Rulers Law (Amendment) Edict No.2 of 1990 was not served before the commencement of the suit.”

The motion was supported by an Affidavit and a Further Affidavit, all sworn to by one Ernest Okafor, a Senior Litigation Officer in the Ministry of Justice, Enugu. Paras. 2, 3, 4, & 5 read as follows:-

“2. That as the Senior Litigation Officer I am conversant with all facts and matters touching and concerning all suits for and against the Government of Anambra State and in particular the present suit.

3. That I also receive all correspondences addressed to the Attorney-General or the Military Governor in respect of all suits instituted against any or all of them.
4. That I swear to this Affidavit on behalf and authority of the 1st, 2nd and 5th applicants.
5. That no notice of intention to sue the Governor or any of his functionary was served on the Governor or any of the functionary as required by the Traditional Rulers (Amendment) Edict 1990.”

The plaintiff in a reaction personally swore to a Counter-Affidavit and a Further Counter-Affidavit paras. 4 – 7 of the Counter-Affidavit which I consider important read thus –

“4. By letter dated 25th July, 1991, the 1st defendant stated that he had withdrawn my recognition as the traditional ruler of Achina under the Traditional Rulers Law with effect from the same 25th July, 1991. A photocopy of the said letter is attached hereto and marked Exhibit A. I shall produce the original at the hearing.

5. I instituted the above suit on 29th July, 1991, after the said 1st defendant/applicant dismissed me as the traditional ruler of Achina.
6. I am advised by my counsel that it would have amounted to an offence punishable under the said edict for me to represent myself as a traditional ruler on or after the said 25th July, 1991, by giving notice as a traditional ruler of my intention to sue the 1st defendant or the 2nd, 3rd, and 5th defendants.
7. The applicant was served with my Writ of Summons on 29th July, 1991, and he appeared by counsel and took part fully in proceedings relating to interim injunction against the defendants without objection. ”

Exhibit A referred to in para. 4 of the plaintiff’s Counter-Affidavit above is reproduced for ease of reference thus

Chief Job Ezemuokwe,

Achina Town,