When High Court Dared the Supreme Court – TheNigerialawyer

Davidson Iriekpen questions the decision of the Ekiti State High
Court, which ordered the reopening of a 19-year-old legal dispute
over the relocation of the headquarters of a local government
already decided by the Supreme Court.

In what could be described as judicial rascality, a 19-year-old
legal dispute that was resolved a few months ago by the Supreme
Court, has again found its way back to the Ekiti State High Court
sitting in Ado Ekiti to start afresh.

The apex court had on December 14, 2018, ordered the Ekiti State
Government to relocate the headquarters of Ilejemeje Local
Government Area. The five-man bench of the court unanimously
ordered the state government to immediately restore the
headquarters of the local government to Eda-Oniyo, from where it
was relocated to Iye-Ekiti shortly after the state was created on
October 1, 1996.

On October 1, 1996, the Federal Military Government created
among others, Ekiti State with Ilejemeje Local Government Area as
one of its 16 local government areas. The headquarters of the LG
was located in Eda-Oniyo with the backing of the States Creation
(Transitional Provisions) Decree No. 36 of 1996.

But three months later, by a radio announcement, the Ekiti State
Government led by then military governor, Col. Inua Mohammed Bawa,
notified the public of the relocation of the local government from
Eda-Oniyo to Iye-Ekiti.

The Eleda of Eda-Oniyo, Oba Julius Awolola was said to have on
behalf of the people of Eda-Oniyo protested to the office of the
Head of State, which informed him that it did not authorise the
movement of the local government to Iye-Ekiti and continued to
recognise Eda-Oniyo as the headquarters of Ilejemeje local
government.

When the protests failed, the traditional ruler, representing
the people of Eda-Oniyo, filed an action in the High Court of Ekiti
State in 1999 against the governor of the state, Attorney General
and the Chairman of the LG. He sought, among others, declaratory
orders that by virtue of the State Creation (Transitional
Provisions) Decree No. 72 Vol. 83 of 1996, and the Local Government
(Basic Constitutional Provisions) Decree of 1997 and 1998, the
headquarters of Ilejemeje LG was Eda-Oniyo.

He also sought a declaration that the relocation of the
headquarters for Eda-Oniyo to Iye-Ekiti as illegal, null and void.
The mornach also sought an order restraining the defendants from
recognising Iye-Ekiti as the headquarters of the LG and a perpetual
injunction restraining them from carrying out the administration of
the LG from any other town apart from Eda-Oniyo.

The High Court ruled in 2001 in favour of Oba Awolola, but the
Ekiti State Government had appealed against the judgment and won at
the Court of Appeal. To challenge the decision of the Court of
Appeal, Oba Awolola, through his lawyer, Mr. Oluwadamilare Awokoya,
filed the appeal marked SC.194/2008 before the Supreme Court.

In its judgement on December 14, 2018, the apex court ordered
the Ekiti State Government to relocate the headquarters of
Ilejemeje Local Government Area. The five-man bench of the court
unanimously ordered the state government to immediately restore the
headquarters of the local government to Eda-Oniyo from where it was
relocated to Iye-Ekiti shortly after the state was created on
October 1, 1996.

Justice Paul Galinje, who read the lead judgment, held that the
establishment of the headquarters of the local government in
Eda-Oniyo was backed by statute and could not be relocated
elsewhere without the promulgation of a new law. He said the act of
relocating the LG headquarters from Eda-Oniyo to Iye-Ekiti by the
Ekiti State Government “has no legal basis”.

“The location of the headquarters of Ilejemeje LG in Eda-Oniyo
is a product of statute and no law has been promulgated to relocate
it to any other place,” he ruled.

The court consequently set aside the Court of Appeal’s judgment
and affirmed that of the High Court. Agreeing with Oba Awolola’s
lawyer, the apex court ruled that non-filing of the suit at the
High Court within three months, when the dispute arose in 1996 as
stipulated in the Public Officers Protection Law of Ekiti State did
not render the suit incompetent.
Incompliance with the apex court’s judgment, Ekiti State Government
on October 21, issued a proclaimation for the relocation of the
council headquarters from Iye Ekiti to Eda Oniyo Ekiti.

Addressing a press conference in Ado-Ekiti, the state Deputy
Governor, Chief Bisi Egbeyemi, said the state took the step
following the advice of the Attorney General and Commissioner for
Justice, Wale Fapohunda and the report of a fact-finding committee,
which advised that by virtue of the Supreme Court’s pronouncement,
that it would be “illegal, irregular, unconstitutional, null and
void” to recognise Iye-Ekiti as the headquarters of the
council.

He consequently directed the Chairman of the council, Hon Sunday
Awolola, and the Commissioner for Local Government Affairs, Prof.
Adio Folayan, to prepare a schedule for the relocation of the
council to the new town.

“The decision of the Supreme Court, the highest court in the
land is sacrosanct and inviolable and is binding on the
government,” adding that by virtue of the pronouncement, all
government departments, institutions, organisations, public
functionaries, corporate bodies and others are expected to
cooperate with government to facilitate smooth relocation.

“That by virtue of the judgment, Eda-Oniyo is the only legally
recognised headquarters of Ilejemeje Local Government Area of the
state. That the headquarters of Ilejemeje Local Government and its
machinery are hereby relocated by Ekiti State Government from
Iye-Ekiti to Eda Oniyo Ekiti,” he said.

Just when the process was on, a fresh suit, penultimate week
appeared again before an Ekiti State High Court sitting in Ado
Ekiti, where the case started in 1999, challenging the Supreme
Court’s judgment.

Rather than summarily shutting down the fresh suit as an affront
and abuse of court process, the judge of the court, Justice Abiodun
Adesodun, urged parties in the suit to maintain status quo pending
its judgment on November 19.

The judge described the action of the state government
“executive rascality and self help,” since according to him, the
matter is already pending before his court. Adesodun, while ruling
on an application by Iye-Ekiti community, said the state government
and the state Attorney General ought to have waited for
determination of the suit before his court before making such
proclamation.

Some of the documents sighted by THISDAY revealed that
dissatisfied by the Supreme Court verdict, the people of Iye-Ekiti,
through their lawyer, Taiwo Kupolati, approached the high court
seeking among others, an order restraining the state government
from moving the council headquarters from Iye Ekiti to Eda Oniyo
Ekiti.

He contended that Iye-Ekiti community was not joined in the suit
leading to the Supreme Court judgment, noting that there was no
statute backing the proclamation of the government on the
relocation.

But observers have described his suit as frivolous and a gross
abuse of court process. They wondered why the lawyer would claim
that Iye-Ekiti community was not joined in the suit leading to the
Supreme Court judgment, when the state government in order to
retain the LG headquarters in Iye-Ekiti, appealed against the
judgment of the High Court which had ordered that the council
headquarters be relocated to Eda Oniyo Ekiti.

They equally stated that assuming that the claimant (Iye Ekiti)
has genuine grievances against the Supreme Court judgment, the
appropriate thing is to go back to the apex court for review, not
the High Court.

Analysts are wondering where the principle of superiority of
courts has gone for the High Court to dare the Supreme Court to
hear afresh a matter it had already determined. One elementary rule
of Nigeria’s judiciary is that the decisions of the apex court are
sancrosanct and binding on all persons and authorities including
all courts with subordinate jurisdiction.
This is why they are worried over the disturbing trend in the
justice sector, where some courts subvert the principle of stare
decisis, one of the most sacred pillars in the administration of
justice.

The principle is a legal doctrine that obligates courts to
follow historical cases, when making a ruling on a similar case. It
ensures that cases with similar scenarios and facts are binding on
courts with subordinate jurisdictions.

“One of the dangers in the country’s democratic experiment is
seeing the impunity we have on other arms of government creeping
into the judiciary, which was seen as revered. While the Supreme
Court has often ruled that there must be an end to litigation,
courts below do not always respect that decision or admonition. And
this is very dangerous,” says a public affairs analyst, who did not
want her name in print.

“The Supreme Court is the highest court in the country. It is
the final place where people seek redress. The tradition is that
when the court resolves or decides a dispute – that is where it
ends. The best any aggrieved parties can do, especially when they
do not properly comprehend or disagree with decision of the court
is to go back and seek interpretation. Certainly not to go back to
the High Court either to seek interpretation or commence the matter
afresh,” says Ferdinard Obieze.