The High Court has declared that it has the Jurisdiction to entertain the chieftaincy case instituted by stakeholders from Gassol LGA of Taraba state, challenging the appointment of Mr. John Agbu Sokwa as the third class Chief of the newly created Kwararrafa Chiefdom in the state.
Justice Dauda Buba, on Thursday, while ruling on an application by the Taraba state government praying the court to dismiss the suit because it was beyond its’ powers to hear the case, explained that section 4 (3) of the appointment of Chiefs and deposition law of Taraba 2018 may not necessarily mean that the court had no jurisdiction to entertain the matter.
” In the case of any dispute the governor, after due inquiry and consultancy with the persons concern in the selection shall be the sole judge as to whether any appointment of any chief or head chief is in accordance with this order”.
He argued that looking at above sub section, the governor shall be the sole judge only after due inquiry and consultation with persons concerned in the selection of the chief or head chief.
He therefore observed that section 4 (3) is not intended to oust the jurisdiction of any court.
“It appears to me that the role conferred on the governor by section 4 (3) is not more than that of an arbitrator who shall take a decision alone after due inquiry and consultation with those concerned with the selection of a chief or head chief.
” Assuming without holding that I am wrong that the intendment of section 4 (3) is to oust the jurisdiction of the court, then in my view it is in conflict with the provision of the constitution and therefore nul and void to the extent of its inconsistency”.
He explained that section 272 (1) of the 1999 constitution as amended conferred unlimited jurisdiction in the High Court.
Justice Dauda further observed that ” of particular interest is the provision of section 4 (8) of the constitution:
“Safe as otherwise provided by this constitution, the exercise of legislative powers by the national assembly or by a house of assembly shall be subject to the Jurisdiction of courts of law and or judicial tribunals established by law;
and accordingly the national assembly or a state house assembly shall not enact any law that oust or purport to oust the jurisdiction of a court of law or a judicial tribunal established by law”.
He explained that in the event of a recalcitrant conduct by the national assembly or a state house of assembly by enacting a law purported to oust the jurisdiction of any court the constitution is supreme as provided by section 1 (1) of the document.
” this constitution is supreme and its provisions shall have binding force on all authorities and persons throughout the Federal Republic of Nigeria and if any other law is inconsistent with the provisions of the constitution, the constitution shall prevail and that other law shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void.
Dauda therefore holds that Section 4 (3) of the chiefs appointment and deposition law relied upon by the defendants was not intended to oust the jurisdiction of the court and so the court will hear the case challenging the appointment of Mr. John Agbu Sokwa as the third class chief of Kwararrafa chiefdom.
Ruling on the question of locus standi of the plaintiffs, Justice Dauda said that while there was no any averment linking the second plaintiff, Sen. Ibrahim Goje with the Kwararrafa Chieftaincy tussle, same cannot be said of the first plaintiff Ibrahim Jauro Isa.
“Therefore without much ado, I am of the opinion that the second plaintiff has not shown that he has any locus standi to prosecute this matter”, he said.
He therefore stroke out the name of Ibrahim Goje, the second plaintiff from the matter.
Justice Dauda said on the other hand, the first plaintiff who had at various times been appointed ward and village head of kwararrafa, in accordance with native law and custom of the area cannot be said to be lacking locus standi in prosecuting the matter.
“Looking at the above facts vis-a-vis the Kwararrafa chiefdom (constitution) order No. 21 of 2018, I am of the opinion that the First Plaintiff cannot be said be lacking locus standi to institute this action.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the plaintiffs had sometimes in October 2018 instituted an action against Mr John Agbu Sokwa, the third class Chief of Kwararrafa Chiefdom in Gassol LGA of Taraba as the first defendant, Governor Darius Ishaku as second defendant and the Attorney General of Taraba State as the third defendant.
The plaintiffs had approach the court to challenge the appointment, enthronement and coronation of Mr John Agbu Sokwa as the third class chief of Kwararrafa chiefdom.
Among the eight prayers of the plaintiffs to the court is the declaration of the appointment, enthronement and coronation of the first defendant by the second defendant as unlawful, unwarranted, oppressive and contrary to the laid down practice and procedure of the appointment and installation of chiefs of Kwararrafa.
They are also seeking for an order restraining the first defendant from parading himself as the third class chief of Kwararrafa chiefdom pending the determination of case before the court.
The defendants, however contended that based on the provisions of section 4 (3) of the chiefs appointment and deposition laws of Taraba State 2018 no court can entertain any matter against the decision of the executive governor as he was conferred with unchallengeable rights to appoint a chief or head chief of any chiefdom in the state.
But the plaintiffs are saying the procedure followed by the first defendant in the appointment of the third class chief of Kwararrafa was wrong as he was said to have been brought in from Wukari, in Wukari Local Government area of the State and had no any link with the ruling families of the area under dispute.
