Human Rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Femi Falana, asserted that the Federal High Court and National Industrial Court do not have the jurisdiction to adjudicate on chieftaincy matters.
In a statement released on Tuesday, Falana accused these courts of incorrectly assuming jurisdiction over such cases, which he deemed “highly erroneous.”
Falana highlighted that sections 251 and 254(C) of the Nigerian Constitution do not support these judicial decisions.
He emphasized that the judgments by these courts have contradicted previous rulings by the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, which clearly delineate the limits of their jurisdiction regarding chieftaincy issues.
“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 in the celebrated case of Tukur v Government of Gongola State (1987) 4 NWLR (117) 517,” Falana stated.
“The question raised in this claim is not a fundamental right question. 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.”
Falana stressed that, based on this precedent, the Federal High Court sitting in Kano should have declined jurisdiction in the chieftaincy dispute.
He pointed out that claims of fundamental rights infringements in such cases are merely ancillary to the primary issue of deposition and reinstatement.
Citing FCMB Plc v Nyama (2014) LPELR-23973 AT 19-20, Falana reiterated that for a court to exercise jurisdiction under the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, the main claim must be the enforcement of fundamental rights.
“Where the main or principal claim is not the enforcement of fundamental right, the jurisdiction of the court cannot be properly exercised under Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules.”
Last week, a Federal High Court in Kano ruled that it has jurisdiction to hear the human rights violation case filed by the dethroned Emir of Kano, Aminu Ado Bayero, and senior councillor, Aminu Dan’agundi, following the reinstatement of Emir Muhammad Sanusi II. The court issued an ex-parte order preventing Governor Abba Yusuf of Kano from reinstating Sanusi until the substantive suit is resolved, and opposed the abolishment of four emirates—Bichi, Gaya, Karaye, and Rano.
Concluding his statement, Falana said, “Section 254(C)(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended has not conferred jurisdiction on the National Industrial Court to hear and determine chieftaincy matters.”
However, a traditional ruler who was deposed by a state Governor without fair hearing is not without a legal redress.
