Follow Us on Google
From Jude Owuamanam, Jos
A Plateau State High Court presided by Justice C. Donglong, has adjourned to October 29, 2026, further proceedings in the suit challenging the June 9 judgement recognising some Hausa residents as indigenes of Jos North Local Government Area.
This followed a disagreement over the legal representation of the judgment creditors.
Justice Donglong, on that date, will rule on a preliminary objection challenging the appearance of a new team of lawyers representing the respondents before proceeding with the substantive applications seeking to set aside the judgment.
Jos North Local Government Council is asking the court to set aside the June 9 judgment after it failed to enter an appearance when the matter came up for hearing.
At Friday’s proceedings, counsel to Jos North Local Government and the indigenous ethnic groups, Chief Garba Pwul, SAN, objected to the appearance of a new legal team representing the respondents, arguing that the lawyers were not originally on record and had failed to comply with the court rules governing change of counsel.
Other News
The defence counsel told journalists after the sitting that court proceedings are regulated by strict procedural rules.
Pwul said that Order 52 of the Rules of the Plateau State High Court required a formal notice of change of counsel before another lawyer can take over a matter.
Pwul said the lengthy arguments made it impossible for the court to deliver an immediate ruling, while the commencement of the court’s annual vacation necessitated an adjournment until October 29.
He appealed to residents, particularly the indigenous people of Jos North, to remain calm and allow the judicial process to run its course.
Counsel to the Berom ethnic group, Edward Pwajok, SAN, also told journalists that the June 9 judgment was delivered after Jos North Local Government did not appear when the matter was heard.
He said the Berom, Afizere and Anaguta ethnic groups subsequently filed separate applications seeking to be joined as interested parties and to have the judgment set aside.
Counsel to the judgment creditors, Yakubu H., SAN, defended the respondents’ action, insisting that every litigant has a constitutional right to engage counsel of his or her choice.
