The ruling was delivered today by a three-member panel led by Justice Okon Abang.

The court granted a stay of execution, effectively maintaining the status quo in the ongoing legal tussle over the Kano Emirate tussle.

The appellate court had earlier set aside a June 20, 2024 ruling by Justice Abubakar Liman of the Federal High Court in Kano on the matter, which nullified the Kano State government’s dissolution of five Emirates in the State and the subsequent reinstatement of Sanusi as the 16th Emir of Kano.

The Court of Appeal then ruled that the lower court lacked jurisdiction over the case.

Read Also: Appeal Court orders fresh hearing into Kano Emirate tussle as Sanusi wins

Dissatisfied with the ruling, an injunction request was filed by Aminu Dan Agundi, against the Kano State Government, the Speaker of the State Assembly, the Inspector General of Police, the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps, and other security agencies.

Dan Agundi sought to restrain the respondents from enforcing the appellate court’s judgment while awaiting the apex court’s decision.

However, in its unanimous decision, the Court of Appeal agreed that the application had merit and granted the injunction.

Justice Abang stated, that the law is settled. The court is enjoined to exercise its discretion judiciously and in the interest of justice.

The ruling ordered that all parties must maintain the status quo ante bellum, preserving the situation as it was before the Federal High Court’s judgement on June 13, 2024.

Justice Abang emphasised that the applicant, having served as Emir for five years before his removal, had legal rights that required protection until the Supreme Court delivers a final verdict.

The post Appeal Court halts Sanusi’s reinstatement appeared first on Afinju FM.

Delivering judgment, Justice Yargata Nimpar, who led a three-member panel, ruled in favour of Oba Olaoye on all 10 grounds of appeal.

Justice K. A. Adedokun of the Oyo State High Court, Ogbomoso, had on October 25, 2023, nullified Oba Olaoye’s selection, describing the process as irregular, null, and void for failing to comply with the provisions of the 1958 Soun Chieftaincy Declaration.

However, the appellate court set aside the lower court’s judgment, effectively reaffirming Oba Olaoye’s legitimacy as the Soun of Ogbomoso.

The post Appeal Court affirms Oba Olaoye as Soun of Ogbomoso appeared first on Afinju FM.

This is against the current practice, where heads of courts hold offices until they attain retirement age or they are removed from office.

The proposed legislation, which is part of the constitution alteration bills being considered by the House Committee on Constitution Review, was sponsored by Manu Soro, who represents the Darazo/Ganjuwa federal constituency of Bauchi State.

The proposed subsection stipulates that any judicial officer appointed as Chief Justice of Nigeria, President of the Court of Appeal, Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, President of the National Industrial Court, Chief Judge of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, Chief Judge of State, Grand Khadi of Sharia Court of Appeal or President of Customary Court of Appeal of a State, shall serve for a five-year non-renewable term and return to their previous role as judges or shall retire if retirement age is attained, whichever comes first.

According to its explanatory memorandum, the bill is geared towards enhancing service efficiency and officer motivation and addressing the overstay of heads of courts.

But, most lawyers, who spoke to reporters think otherwise. They do not agree that it would motivate officers and enhance efficiency; rather their argument is that it would shortchange some states, particularly those that send young judges to the apex court.

The National Publicity Secretary of the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA, Bridget Edokwe, clearly disagreed with the lawmakers’ argument, stressing that there is no need to change a flawless system.

Also, in his submission, a Lagos-based lawyer, Marcellus Onah, thinks what the lawmakers are proposing is unnecessary, because according to him, if that is allowed to happen, then it would no longer be appointment based on professional merit but political apportionment, to serve the interest of the political class.

However, for Malachy Ugwummadu, a human rights lawyer and public affairs commentator, it is the question of motive. He noted that there is nothing wrong with the current position where the heads of the courts retire at the age of 70 or after completion of 35 years in service, pointing out the danger of changing the current position.

To avoid such a dilemma, he said the only caveat that can be put there is where you now put a proviso that where such a person becomes, either because of ill health or any other consideration, incapable of discharging the functions of his office, such a person shall leave.

The post Lawyers tackle NASS over proposed 5-year term appeared first on Afinju FM.