In a landmark ruling that has further complicated the already contentious emirship tussle in Kano State, the Federal High Court in Kano has nullified all actions taken by the Kano state government to repeal the Kano Emirates Council Law.
This decision, which has unleashed far-reaching implications for the state’s traditional leadership structure, has sparked a fresh wave of controversy, shedding light on broader issues of governance, legality, and jurisdiction in Nigeria.
The backstory
Tekedia Mini-MBA edition 15 (Sept 9 – Dec 7, 2024) has started registrations; register today for early bird discounts.
Tekedia AI in Business Masterclass opens registrations here.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and invest in Africa’s finest startups here.
The recent legal battle stems from the Kano House of Assembly’s decision to repeal the Kano Emirates Council Law. Following this legislative action, Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf implemented the repeal by dethroning Alhaji Aminu Ado Bayero as Emir of Kano. Additionally, the governor reversed the creation of four new emirates—Bichi, Rano, Karaye, and Gaya—and sacked the emirs appointed by his predecessor, Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje. The repealed law was also cited to reappoint Muhammadu Sanusi II, who had been dethroned by Ganduje in 2020, as the 16th Emir of Kano.
Aminu Babba Danagundi, the Sarkin Dawaki Babba and a kingmaker in the former Kano emirate challenged the legality of these government actions. Represented by his counsel, Chikaosolu Ojukwu (SAN), Danagundi petitioned the court to declare the government’s actions null and void, arguing that the procedures were flawed and politically motivated.
The Court’s Ruling
On Thursday, Justice Abdullahi Muhammad Liman ruled in favor of Danagundi, setting aside the Kano state government’s actions and ordering all parties to maintain the status quo. Justice Liman criticized the defendants for disregarding an interim court order and emphasized the need for adherence to legal processes.
Justice Liman said the defendants were aware of the interim order granted by the court but chose to ignore it and went ahead with the implementation of the law. He further warned that he would assume his coercive powers to enforce compliance with his order, highlighting the judiciary’s role in upholding the rule of law.
However, due to his recent elevation to the Court of Appeal, Justice Liman transferred the case to Justice Simon Amobeda for continuation.
The Judgment’s Controversy and Jurisdiction Issue
The ruling has ignited significant controversy, with critics labeling it a “black market judgment”, which appears to have cast fresh stench on the Nigerian judiciary.
The issue of jurisdiction has been a central point of contention throughout the legal tussle. Legal experts assert that the Federal High Court lacks jurisdiction over matters related to emirship, traditionally considered outside its purview.
Earlier, rights activist and senior lawyer Femi Falana, SAN, had strongly criticized the Federal High Court’s intervention.
“The intervention of the Federal High Court in the dispute arising from the deposition of Emir Ado Bayero & co as well as the restoration of Emir Sanusi Lamido Sanusi is a brazen repudiation of the decision of the Supreme Court,” Falana said.
Citing the case of Tukur versus the Government of Gongola State (1987), Falana recalled the apex court ruling that “The question raised in this claim is not a fundamental right question” because “the right to be Emir is not guaranteed by the Fundamental Rights provisions of the Constitution and the Federal High Court has no jurisdiction whatever in the matter.”
The Kano state government has accused former Governor Umar Ganduje of using federal influence to manipulate the court’s judgment. This accusation adds another layer of political intrigue to the legal proceedings, suggesting that the battle over the emirship is as much about political power as it is about traditional leadership.
Last week, the Federal High Court in Kano ruled against the Kano State government and others challenging the court’s jurisdiction over the matter. Delivering the ruling on jurisdiction, Justice Abdullahi M. Liman held that the court has jurisdiction to entertain issues concerning the applicant’s fundamental human rights, relying on Section 42 sub-section 1 and Section 315 of the 1999 Constitution as amended.
But Falana further noted that since the apex court has ruled that the right to be an emir is not a fundamental right under Chapter Four of the Constitution, the Federal High Court in Kano should have declined jurisdiction. He argued that the allegation of infringement of fundamental rights was ancillary to the substantive reliefs concerning the deposition and reinstatement of the embattled emirs.
The controversial court ruling is seen as a reflection of broader issues within the Nigerian judiciary. The Kano and Federal High Courts have been issuing conflicting orders on the emirship dispute. The case has highlighted the perception of judicial overreach, prompting critical concerns about the integrity of the Nigerian judiciary.
Legal experts believe the judgment has significant implications for the Nigerian judiciary, particularly as it overrules the precedent set by the Supreme Court.
“Today in Kano, Abdullahi Liman, a judge of the Federal High Court, has overruled longstanding Supreme Court precedent, assumed jurisdiction he does not have to grant reliefs the parties did not ask for in exercise of powers that he lacks. Anyone who does this is a rogue, not a judge,” Human rights activist and lawyer, Chidi Odinkalu, said.