An Okitipupa High Court has dismissed a suit challenging the appointment of the Kalasuwe of Apoi in Ese-Odo Local Government Area of Ondo State, Prof Sunday Amuseghan.
Amuseghan, a former teacher at Adekunle Ajasin University, Akungba-Akoko (AAUA), was appointed by kingmakers on January 29 to the stool of the Yoruba-speaking Ijaw-Apoi ethnic group.
The appointment was approved by the state government on February 13.
In a suit filed on February 9, the claimant, Prince Joseph David of the Ugele-Udumu Ruling House, sought the order of court to set aside the appointment.
This, he said, is on the ground that he (David) had been appointed by the kingmakers since 2010, while the state government “unjustifiably” refused to approve his own appointment.
In the reliefs filed by his lawyer, Omolegbon Odusola, the claimant insisted that while his appointment subsisted, the kingmakers could not legally appoint the first defendant (Amuseghan) or any other person as the Kalasuwe.
David urged the court to set aside the appointment of the first defendant, which he said violated the customary law regulating the selection of the Kalasuwe of Apoi and the chiefs’ law of Ondo State.
The prince also sought a perpetual injunction restraining the first defendant from parading himself as the Kalasuwe.
He urged the court to compel the state government to approve his own appointment.
But in a preliminary objection filed on May 7 by counsel to Amuseghan and the nine Apoi kingmakers, Chief Olusola Ebiseni, urged the court to decline jurisdiction and dismiss the suit.
The lawyer said it was premature, having been instituted prior to the approval of the appointment by the State Executive Council (Exco).
Other grounds, the lawyer said, included the fact that the claimant lacked the locus standi to bring the suit while it also disclosed no reasonable cause of action.
In his ruling on preliminary objection, presiding judge, Justice A. Adegbehingbe, noted that counsel to the defendants filed, along with his written address in support of the preliminary objection, a Certified True Copy (CTC) of the declaration on the Kalasuwe of Apoi chieftaincy, which was registered on March 1, 2007.
The court held that “in all the submissions made by the claimant’s counsel, he did not state that the registered declaration was not in place or was not registered”.
It also held that the Kalasuwe of Apoi declaration was a subsidiary legislation of which he was bound to take judicial notice by the provisions of Section 122(4) of the Evidence Act 2011.
The court said the claimant had not disclosed a reasonable cause of action in his statement of claim, adding that it had no jurisdiction to hear the case.
The court struck out the matter.