By Gabriel Amalu
The agreement by the police and the department of state security (DSS), to enforce the administrative banishment of the deposed Emir of Kano, Mohammed Sanusi, to Awe, in Nassarawa state, exposed our country as a feudal democracy.
According to the midwives of this strange doctrine, it is in accordance with tradition that a deposed Emir, should be forced to go on exile. And pronto, security agencies created under the 1999 constitution (as amended), obeyed a command not within the contemplation of the constitution that created them. What a travesty of constitutionalism.
So, if we may ask, which law is supreme in Nigeria? The 1999 constitution of the federal republic of Nigeria, or the customs and mores of the constituent parts of the country? If it is the constitution, under what part of the constitution or laws derived therefrom, was the former Emir banished from Kano, and other parts of Nigeria to Awe?
But if such an archaic custom is supreme, one can then ask, can a talakawa, depose and exile the supreme leader of the Kano Emirate?
Perhaps our nation is trapped in the web of a feudal democracy? While the power elites answer modern titles like governors and presidents, and exercise powers donated as such by the constitution, they are at hearts, feudalists, and so acts as feudal lords when dealing with the electorates, who they treat as subjects.
Could this conflicting mind-set be the reason why our nation is trapped in a web of underdevelopment? Could it be why, corruption is so endemic, as public officials see public funds as belonging to the chief executive, because he has custody of the funds in trust?
While it is heartening that a federal High Court has granted an interim relief to the Emir, based on which the Governor of Kaduna State, Mallam El Rufai, sprang the Emir out from the illegal detention, if truly we are a democratic nation, those who gave the unlawful order, and those who obeyed it, should be sanctioned under the law.
It should not be glossed over that despite the clear provisions of our constitution on the liberty of citizens, a so called Attorney-General, whether of state or federal, or even the president of the country or the governor of a state can unilaterally without a court order, order the banishment and detention of a citizen, without consequences.
The provision of sections 35 and 41 are clear, and if an eminent citizen like Sanusi, can be treated with such indignity, it is better imagined how the rich and mighty treat the poor and lowly in our society, without consequences.
Section 35(1) of the 1999 constitution says clearly: “Every person shall be entitled to his personal liberty and no person shall be deprived of such liberty save in the following cases and in accordance with a procedure permitted by law.”
The circumstance upon which a person can be deprived of his liberty were listed in paragraphs a-f. Paragraphs (a) provide: “in execution of the sentence or order of a court in respect of a criminal offence of which he has been found guilty”, (b) “by reason of his failure to comply with the order of a court or in order to secure the fulfilment of any obligation imposed upon him by law”, and (c) “for the purpose of bringing him before a court in execution of the order of a court or upon reasonable suspicion of his having committed a criminal offence, or to such extent as may be reasonably necessary to prevent his committing a criminal offence”
The other three paragraphs deals with a minor who is apprehended for the purpose of his education or welfare; a person suffering from infectious disease, persons of unsound mind, drug addicts, or vagrants for the purpose of their care or treatment, and lastly, for the purpose of preventing unlawful entry into Nigeria.
But for any of the aforementioned paragraphs, no person can lawfully be deprived of his personal liberty, as the Kano state government and her accomplices did to the former Emir, before the court intervened.
Section 41(1) provides that: “Every citizen of Nigeria is entitled to move freely throughout Nigeria to reside in any part thereof, and no citizen of Nigeria shall be expelled from Nigeria or refused entry thereto or exit therefrom.”
Subsection (2) make a number of exception which in no way can be alluded to the former Emir, to warrant the archaic, obnoxious and repugnant tradition of restricting the movement of a citizen, without a court order, as the government did.
Read Also: Sanusi’s deposition and martyrdom
If not the state government, who gave the administrative order that citizen Sanusi should be restricted to Awe, in Nassarawa state?
Are the culprits ignorant of section 1(1) of the constitution, which provides that: “This constitution is supreme and its provisions shall have binding force on all authorities and persons throughout the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
”? In sub-section (2) it further provides: “The federal Republic of Nigeria shall not be governed, nor shall any person or group of persons take control of the government of Nigeria or any part thereof, except in accordance with the provision of this constitution.”
Indeed, as far back as the 19th century, Chief Justice John Marshall of the United States of America, in Marbury vs Madison (1803) 5 US 137, adumbrated on the supremacy of a written constitution, when he said: “Certainly, all those who have framed written constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation….” Nigeria no doubt, falls within the contemplation of the dictum by his Lordship, the Chief Justice of a country from which we borrowed our presidential system of government.
Here in Nigeria, Justice Nnaemeka-Agu, of the Supreme Court, in Imonikhe vs A. G. Bendel State, held: “A constitution is the organic law, a system or body of fundamental principles according to which a state, or body or organisations is constituted.” Confirming the constitution as the summon jus,
Justice Kayode Eso in Kalu vs Odili, also held: “It is both a fundamental and elementary principle of our laws that the constitution is the basic law of the land. It is the supreme law and its provisions have binding force on all authorities, institutions and persons throughout the country. All other laws derive their force and authority from the constitution.”
For this column, while the circumstance of the deposition of Emir Sanusi, deserves our sympathy, what is most scary is the capacity of a democratically elected government, to exercise the power of a despotic government, by banishing a citizen, without any court order. Unless we wean our country from such flagrant abuse of the summon jus, we will never become an egalitarian society.
Muhammadu Sanusi versus the North — who finally blinks? That nestles in the womb of time!
Leave a Reply