The Court of Appeal on Friday stayed the enforcement of its January 10 judgment setting aside the June 20 order by Justice Abubakar Liman of the Federal High Court, Kano, nullifying the steps/actions taken by the Kano State Government pursuant to the Kano State Emirate Council (Repeal) Law 2024, including the appointment of Sanusi Lamido Sanusi as the 16th Emir of Kano.
The Appeal Court grated the order for stay of execution, pending the determination of the pending appeals before the Supreme Court, in two rulings in Abuja on Friday in two applications, filed by Agundi.
In the January 10 judgment, three-member panel of the Court of Appeal, Kano, which sat in Abuja, held that the order nullifying the steps taken by the Kano State Government pursuant to the 2024 Emirates Council Law was made by Justice Liman without jurisdiction.
The appellate court found that the fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by an aggrieved king maker – Alhaji Aminu Babba Dan Agundi – on which basis Justice Liman issued the June 20 order, was not only invalid, the Federal High Court lacked the jurisdiction to hear it.
Read Also: Supreme Court fixes June 6 for judgment in 20-year old dispute over Gwandu Emirate stool
Agundi appealed the judgment to the Supreme Court and filed both applications for stay of execution pending the determination of his appeal before the apex court.
Delivering the ruling of a three-member panel of the Court of Appeal in Abuja on Friday, justice Okon Abang said the court found that the applications for stay were meritorious and deserving of the court’s discretion in the interest of justice.
Justice Abang said: “The law is settled, the court is enjoined to exercise its discretion judiciously and in the interest of justice.*
He noted that a valid appeal was already pending before the Supreme Court, reinforcing the need to preserve the subject matter of the litigation.
Justice Abang added: “In my view, I hold that the balance of convenience lies in his favour. It is deserving to protect him pending the determination of the Supreme Court.”