Tag: Appeal court

Communal crisis is looming in Akure, the Ondo State capital, as the Deji of Akure, Oba Aladetoyinbo Ogunlade Aladelusi, moves to implement an Appeal Court judgment, which declared the Iralepo of Isikan to be a Quarter Chief in Akure.

The Iralepo was upgraded to a Class C monarch under the administration of the late former Governor Oluwarotimi Akeredolu.

After the death of Iralepo of Isikan, High Chief Olu Ojo, the Akure monarch appointed Chief Henry Gbenga as the next Iralepo in line, based on his power(s) to appoint minor chiefs in Akure kingdom, but Prince Olugbenga Ojo, who was picked by the Omowa Isikan (kingmakers).was installed as Oba.

In 2022, the state government issued a White Paper, which recognised Iralepo stool as a Class C Oba.

But the Court of Appeal declared that it was unlawful to admit the Chieftaincy title of Iralepo into Part 1 of the Chiefs Laws of Ondo State as a recognised Chief with the consent of the Deji of Akure.

It also granted an order of perpetual injunction restraining the Ondo State Government from appointing or installing anyone as the Iralepo of Isikan Quarters.

Read Also: NAAT demands payment of withheld salaries, others 

Less than 48 hours after the court’s ruling, the Deji of Akure ordered immediate suspension of Ojo as the Iralepo of Isikan and cautioned him to desist from parading himself under any guise.

Oba Aladetoyinbo announced appointment of Adeyeye as the new Iralepo of Isikan Quarters, Akure.

A statement by spokesman for the Akure monarch, Michael Adeyeye, said Ojo was requested to vacate the traditional palace of the Iralepo of Isikan with immediate effect and hand over all palace property within his possession to the appropriate quarters for proper documentation.

According to the statement, “in view of the installation and appointment of High Chief Gbenga Henry Adeyeye as the new Iralepo of Isikan quarters, he is now entitled to wear all paraphernalia of office attached to the stool of the Iralepo of Isikan, while Mr. Gbenga Ojo is advised to desist from parading himself in whatever manner.

“We wish to inform Mr. Ojo that any violation of the afore-stated shall be met with stiffer penalties, including committal proceedings.”

Oba Aladetoyinbo subsequently presented certificate to the new Iralepo,  witnessed by the Omowa of Isikan.

But the Olisa of Isikan, Chief Kayode Oluyi, said the ancient throne of Iralepo was not any child’s play susceptible to the theatre of absurdity.

He said the Iralepo of Isinkan had only been appointed by the people of Isinkan and never by the Deji of Akure nor subject to his approval.

“We implore our people to peacefully go about their businesses and not do or be involved in anything that will portray the great peace loving people of Isinkan as discourteous rabble rousing bumpkins.

“While we take due cognisance of the judgment of the Court of Appeal and exercising our further rights in that respect under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, we wish to assure all that the throne of the Iralepo of Isinkan is not vacant, as Oba Oluwagbemiga Ajimokunola Olofin-Adimula (Arulewolasi III), the Olusi Obarisa, remains and sits on the throne and in the palace of the Iralepo of Isinkan.”

The Olu of Aladodo, Ayodeji Fatoki, said no Deji had ever installed or removed any Iralepo of Isinkan.

He said the “Deji wants to cause crisis in the state capital.”

A member of the House of Representatives, Solomon T. Bob, has faulted a claim by Lagos lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana (SAN), that the Court of Appeal judgment in the Rivers case does not cover the 2025 budget.

After the Supreme Court dismissed Governor Similayi Fubara’s appeal against the Court of Appeal judgment, Falana said the case had to do only with the “expired” 2024 budget.

But in a statement yesterday, Bob, also a lawyer who represents the Abua/Odual and Ahoada East Federal Constituency of Rivers State, said the substantive Appeal Court judgment was all-encompassing.

The Supreme Court had dismissed Fubara’s appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal which earlier upheld the judgment of Justice Joseph Omotosho of the Federal High Court.

Bob argued that Justice Omotosho’s judgment, delivered on January 22, 2024, touched on the entirety of the issues at the centre of the crisis.

These, Bob noted, include leadership and membership of the Rivers State House of Assembly and the presentation of the 2024 Appropriation law or any presentations to the House of Assembly.

The lawmaker alluded to one of Justice Omotosho’s orders where he held: “An Order is hereby made restraining the 11th defendant (Fubara) from howsoever or in whatsoever manner making any request, presentation, or nomination in the Rivers State House of Assembly except to the House of Assembly under the leadership of the second plaintiff (Speaker Martin Amaewhule).”

Bob said: “Clearly, the judgment does not address the question of the 2024 budget presentation alone but all subsequent presentations (including that of 2025), requests or nominations before the Rivers State House of Assembly.

“As the above order shows, Mr. Falana was wrong. He was also downplaying the dire ramifications of spending without an appropriation law. He also claimed that the dismissed appeal did not touch on the question of membership of the Rivers State House of Assembly.

Read Also: Adeleke, Oyetola trade words over enforcement of Appeal Court verdict

“Indeed, virtually all the reliefs sought and granted by the Federal High Court and the decision of the Court of Appeal affirmed the subsisting membership of the House of Assembly by the 27 legislators.

“By reason of Section 272(3) of the Constitution, only the Federal High Court is vested with jurisdiction on any question of vacancy in the seats of a House of Assembly.”

The lawmaker insisted that Justice Omotosho’s judgment (with the affirming appeals) remains the only decision by a court with the requisite jurisdiction to have pronounced on the status of the 27 Rivers Assembly members.

“Mr. Falana’s insistence that they have lost their seats is outrageous. It lacks legal basis,” he said.

Bob averred that contrary to Falana’s opinion, Section 109(1)(g) of the Constitution is not self-executing, stressing that under a constitutional democracy, no law is.

This is so, he stressed, because every constitutional provision is ultimately subject to judicial interpretation.

“To suggest otherwise is to deny the imperative of judicial review,” Bob said.

Accordingly, the lawmaker insisted that Falana’s position was misleading.

“No matter how much legal knowledge he professes, his opinion remains his personal opinion and cannot approximate to the law.

“As Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once famously said, the law is ‘the prophecies of what the courts will do in fact…’

“As Rivers State reels under Fubara’s unexampled and delinquent misrule, and the courts undo his myriad criminal misdeeds, a lawyer of Mr. Falana’s prominence should at least respect their decision, not mislead the public,” Bob added.