News

BREAKING: Kano Court Takes Up Deposed Emir’s Case

A Federal High Court sitting in Kano has asserted its jurisdiction to hear the human rights case brought forward by the deposed Emir of Kano, Aminu Ado Bayero, and a senior councillor, Aminu Babba DanAgundi.

The decision comes after the court previously issued an ex-parte order halting the reinstatement of Emir Muhammadu Sanusi II and the abolishment of four emirates by the Kano State government.

The lawsuit centers on alleged human rights violations stemming from the removal of Bayero and the enthronement of Sanusi. The plaintiffs argue that their rights were infringed upon during the process.

Justice Limam Mohammed on Thursday, ordered all parties to maintain status quo ante in the passage and assent of the bill.

He said: “That parties are hereby ordered to maintain status quo ante pending hearing of the fundamental rights application.

“In view of the constitutional and jurisdictional issues apparent on the
face of the application, parties shall address the court on the same at the hearing of the fundamental rights application which is fixed for the 3rd of June, 2024.

“That in order to maintain the peace and security of the state, an Interim Injunction of this Honourable Court is granted restraining the respondents from enforcing, executing, implementing and operationalizing the Kano State Emirate Law Council (Repeal) Law.

“That parties are hereby ordered to maintain status quo ante the passage and assent of the bill into pending the hearing of the fundamental rights application.”

Initially, there were questions about the court’s authority to preside over the case.

However, Justice Liman, referencing Section 42 of the Nigerian Constitution, established the court’s jurisdiction in this matter.

“What I find intriguing is the respondents total reliance on this case of Gongola, whereas Section 42 Sub-section 1 of the Constitution has clearly spelt out the jurisdictional powers of the Federal High Court to preside over such cases.

“My respectful view is that the case of Tukur against the Gongola is indistinguishable with the present case. Section 42 Sub-section 1 and Section 32 of the Constitution have vested a power on our court to decide on this matter,” the judge noted.

The plaintiff’s lawyer, Barrister Chukwuson Ojukwu, urged the court to proceed with the main hearing, challenging the Emir’s reappointment and Bayero’s removal. However, the defense lawyer, Barrister A. G Wakil, argued that this exceeded the scope of the original human rights claim.

Justice Liman acknowledged the sensitivity of the case and adjourned proceedings until Friday, June 14, 2024, for further proceedings.

Back to top button