Kano Emirate Tussle: State Assembly Alleges Bias, Asks Appeal Court to Take over Proceedings

Wale Igbintade in Lagos and Adedayo Akinwale in Abuja

Ahead of the ruling of Justice Abdullahi Liman of the Federal High Court, Kano, on a motion filed by Aminu Danagundi, the Sarkin Dawaki Babba, challenging the legality of the Kano Emirates Council (Repeal) Law 2024, the Kano State House of Assembly has asked the Court of Appeal sitting in Kano to stay further proceedings at the Federal High Court pending the hearing of the appeal before the appellate court.

The call came as All Progressives Congress (APC) described comments credited to the presidential candidate of New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) in the 2023 election, Rabiu Kwankwaso, that the ruling party was trying to take Kano State through the backdoor by declaring a state of emergency, as disappointing and insensitive.

Liman had scheduled ruling on the legality of the Kano Emirates Council (Repeal) Law 2024 for Thursday, June 20, 2024, just after he dismissed an application for a stay of proceedings by Eyitayo Fatogun, representing the Kano State House of Assembly.

Dissatisfied, Kano State House of Assembly, in Appeal No: CA/KN/ /26/2024 filed by its lawyer, Fatogun, prayed for an order of injunction restraining the respondents, their privies, servants or any other person or authority, deriving power, authority, rights or privileges from any of the respondents particularly the first, fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh respondents from enforcing or attempting to further enforce the repealed Kano State Emirates Council Law, a law which was no longer extant, pending the hearing and determination of the appeal before the Court of Appeal.

The appellant also prayed the court to stay execution of all orders, particularly the ex-parte order granted on May 23, 2024 by the lower court pending the hearing and determination of the appeal presently before the court.

The respondents are Alhaji Aminu Babba Danagundi; Kano State Government; Attorney General of Kano State; Commissioner of Police, Kano State; Inspector General of Police; Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps; and Department of State Services.

In its motion on notice brought pursuant to Sections 6 and 36 of the 1999 Constitution, Order 7 Rule 1 of the Court of Appeal Rules and under inherent jurisdiction of the court, the appellant prayed the court to take over the entire proceedings, alleging that there were conflicting orders of the Kano State High Court and the Federal High Court on same subject matter.

In its application for an urgent date, the appellant stated that the Federal High Court in Kano on or about June 13, 2024, had delivered its ruling in a suit filed for the enforcement of the fundamental rights of a king maker as it related to the Kano State Emirate Council (repeal) Law 2024 made by the House of Assembly of Kano State and duly assented by the executive governor of Kano State.

In the said ruling, the court in its wisdom, held that it had jurisdiction in a chieftaincy matter, and subsequently adjourned to June 14, 2024, for the hearing of the several applications filed by the applicant, particularly the application seeking to nullify the Kano State Emirate Council (repeal) Law 2024.

The appellant further stated, “On the 13th day of June 2024, we immediately attempted to file our Notice of Appeal but were denied the opportunity by the Registry of the Federal High Court in Kano on the grounds that it was well after 2pm and they would not take processes anymore.

“Of great interest is that the registry continued to take processes for filing in other matters, which were not related to the above mentioned suit.

“We, therefore, filed the notice of appeal at the Court of Appeal Registry and filed alongside an application for departure from the rules.

“On the 14th of June 2024, the Registry of the Federal High Court did not open till 9am due to hostility and fear of collecting processes from us for filing. We also applied for the ruling of the 13th day of June 2024, assuming jurisdiction, but as suspected, the ruling is not yet ready.

“We compiled records with the documents we were served, though uncertified but largely the documents filed by the plaintiff at the lower court and were given an appeal number as indicated above. We certainly would compile supplementary records shortly upon receipt of the proceedings and ruling.

“We consequently filed a motion for stay of proceedings or further proceedings before His Lordship.

“It may be of interest that your Lordship be informed that all these issues were brought to the attention of His Lordship. Hon Justice A. M Liman but in a short ruling today refused an application for stay of proceedings, despite becoming aware of the motion pending in the Court of Appeal.”

The appellant submitted that an appeal shall be deemed to have been entered in the court when the record of proceedings in the court below had been received in the Registry of the court.

He stated, “Where there is an application before a higher court for a stay of further proceedings in the lower court, a decision by the lower court, which will render the result of such application nugatory, should be avoided.

“This unfortunate attitude in disregarding the process of the Court of Appeal bothers on judicial impertinence. it is an affront on the authority of the Court of Appeal. All the courts established under the constitution derive their powers and ‘authority’ from the constitution.

“His lordship went ahead to hear an interlocutory application seeking to nullify the Kano State Emirate Council (repeal) Law 2024, which is the subject matter of the suit before My Lord.

“All entreaties, including learned silk, Eyitayo Fatogun SAN’s recusing himself and applying that the matter be adjourned so that the parties he was representing could get other legal representation, fell on deaf ears as his lordship went ahead with the hearing of the motion.

“The effect of the grant of the motion heard by my lord, of the Federal High Court, when His Lordship delivers ruling on Thursday, the 20th of June 2024, is that the Emirate Council law as it is in force in Kano may be nullified, and the present Emir of Kano, HRM, Lamido Sanusi, may be removed from his palace as the police have hinted on carrying out the orders of the Federal High Court.”

They argued that the Federal High Court had determined the entire appeal based on jurisdiction as the court had continued to assume jurisdiction.

The appellant further averred, “It would set a bad precedent of lower courts choosing not to respect the decisions or proceedings of the higher court

“The Federal High Court with its disposition might grant the orders prayed for and cause that the five emirates and their emirs, some of whom have left the state for peace to reign would then have to return, causing chaos and uprising in the state

“The loss of lives, which might be occasioned by the ruling, may be rather too much, as the peace in the state may be breached.

“It is in the interest of justice that the Court of Appeal takes over the entire proceedings as there are conflicting orders of the Kano State High Court and Federal High Court on the same subject matter.”

Meanwhile, APC criticised comments credited to Kwankwaso that the ruling party was trying to take Kano State through a state of emergency as disappointing and insensitive.

National Publicity Secretary of APC, Felix Morka, in a statement issued yesterday, noted that Kwankwaso’s wild and unhinged comments were made in reference to the lingering Emirate tussle in Kano.

Morka stated that the ruling party expected Kwankwaso to demonstrate high grade discretion, and a better grip of the severe social, political and security implications of unguarded utterances capable of fuelling tension and strife in Kano.

He added that it was disturbing that Kwankwaso would accuse the federal government of attempting to create a new breed of Boko Haram terrorists — “the same Boko Haram that had inflicted unspeakable and despicable acts of terror that have destroyed the lives of innocent citizens and our heroic men and women in uniform”.

He added, “Without any shred of evidence, he (Kwankwaso) further alleged that certain individuals in APC fold were goading the federal government with the goal of reclaiming Kano State through a declaration of a state of emergency.

“We consider Kwankwaso’s comments to be disappointing, highly incendiary and unconscionable for an individual of his standing.”

Morka said in his unhinged bid to lash out, Kwankwaso ignored the federal government’s glaring neutrality on the emirate crisis in Kano from the outset.

He stressed that as a government that thrived on respect for the rule of law and constitutional liberties, the federal government had confidence in the courts to fairly adjudicate the matter already before them, and had no need or reason to side with any of parties in the emir-ship dispute.

APC stated that as a statesman, Kwankwaso should busy himself with exploring and exhausting all avenues for political and peaceful solutions to the royal impasse rather than amplifying the drums of strife and upheaval.

It maintained that the situation in Kano State called for calm, as the country awaited judicial or political resolution of all outstanding matters.

The ruling party stated that the people of Kano deserved to live in peace, unity and security.