Bolanle OlabimtanFemi Falana, a human rights lawyer, says the federal high court in Kano was wrong to have assumed jurisdiction to hear the case on the emirship dispute in the state.
Citing the case of Tukur vs Government of Gongola State 4 NWLR 517, Falana quoted the supreme court to have said: “The right to be Emir is not guaranteed by the fundamental rights provisions of the constitution and the federal high court has no jurisdiction whatever in the matter.”Falana also quoted Adolphus Karibi-White, a former justice of the supreme court, to have said in the case of Olaniyi V.
“In any case, the allegation of infringement of the fundamental rights of the applicants is an ancillary claim to the substantive reliefs emanating from the deposition and reinstatement of the embattled emirs,” he added.In addition, Falana also faulted the judgment of the national industrial court in Kaduna, which ordered the reinstatement of Jonathan Zamuna as the chief of Piriga chiefdom in Lere LGA of the state.
“The payment of stipend to a traditional ruler by a state government cannot turn him into an employee or a public officer.”He said the controversy over whether traditional rulers are public officers was laid to rest in the case of John Eze v Okechukwu 2002] 14 SCM 105.
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: PremiumTimesng - 🏆 3. / 78 Read more »
Source: GuardianNigeria - 🏆 1. / 94 Read more »
Source: DailyPostNGR - 🏆 11. / 59 Read more »
Source: DailyPostNGR - 🏆 11. / 59 Read more »
Kano Emirate Tussle: Court Reserves Judgement On Bayero’s SuitThe Latest News from Nigeria and Around the World
Source: channelstv - 🏆 7. / 63 Read more »
Source: DailyPostNGR - 🏆 11. / 59 Read more »