Kano Emirate dispute: Court reserves judgement on Aminu Bayero’s 7rights application case against Kano Govt

From Desmond Mgboh Kano

A Federal High Court sitting in Kano and presided by Justice S A Amobede has reserved judgement in the right application case filed by Aminu Ado Bayero against the Kano State government.

At the resumption of the case, Friday counsel to Kano State government, Mahmoud A Magaji (SAN) urged the court to dismiss the application on grounds that the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case.

According to him, all the claims canvassed by the applicant are linked to Aminu”s deposition as the Emir of Kano which in itself is linked to chieftaincy affairs which is outside the jurisdiction of the court.

He noted that the allegation of a breach of his rights is auxiliary to his deposition adding that a court cannot adjudicate on an auxiliary claim, if it had no jurisdiction over the main claim.

He submitted that the applicant was deposed six days before approaching the court at which time he was already bound by the new Kano Emirate Law and was no longer the Emir .

“”Neither he, me or the court will pretend to the fact that at the time of filing the case he was no longer an Emir and if that is established, we therefore submit that his purported right as the Emir no longer exists” he argued

Magaji explained that the Emir of Kano was not a member of the Kano State House of Assembly who must be invited before a law is passed by the legislators while also remarking that in the case of law making, fair hearing isn’t an ingredient.

In his response, counsel to Aminu Ado Bayero, Michael Jonathan Numa, urged the court to nullify the submission of his opponent, insisting that the court has jurisdiction to hear the case

He also drew the attention of the court to the fact that the alleged default in the mode of commencement of the process, which the respondent highlighted orally, was not argued in their written address.

He also faulted his opponent citations, which drew a lot from the legal issues surrounding the deposition of the Emir of Muri in1987, describing them as archaic as many of the pronouncements have been overtaken by developments

He insisted that there was no place in their prayers where they had challenged the deposition of the Emir as was purported by the counsel to the respondents adding that their submission was totally exteraneous to their prayers.

With regard to the motion seeking the court to discharge its restraining order, Mahmoud Magaji presented a 25 paragraph affidavit supported by a written address.

He urged the court to discharge the restraining order on the grounds the counsel to Bayero had misled the court into granting the orders.

In a counter affidavit, Bayero s counsel prayed the court to adjudge the motion as unmeritorious given the multiplicity of the claims on jurisdiction.

He also drew the attention of the court that the state government was in contempt of the very orders they were asking the court to discharge.

He regretted that rather than seek to vacate the order, the state government went ahead to get a counter order, disobeyed the order as well as made disparaging claims against the order.