Posts by solomon2day
-
A good Disposition
- By solomon2day
- On 15/08/2024
- In Special Report
Our God speaks to us in our hearts. He puts good thoughts into our minds and ensures that we have a good disposition.Genesis 13:12-18
But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the LORD exceedingly.
15For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever.
-
Living with Evil
- By solomon2day
- On 11/08/2024
- In Update with Solomon
The evil deeds of some state governors are limiting factors when they involve interfacing with law enforcement agencies.Indeed, the situation has become so bad to the extent that the people no longer trust political office holders to guarantee the safety of lives and property.
Sadly, a number of state governors are very reluctant to move against cultists who have continued to wreak havoc in the affected states.
Interaction is preferably by representation, because a lot is still hidden, that is gradually coming to light.
Indeed, the evil that men do lives with them and has become their shadows.
No responsible law-abiding and right-thinking Nigerian will subscribe to calls by some individuals to cooperate with criminals. Perhaps -
God will provide
- By solomon2day
- On 11/08/2024
- In Special Report
Let us believe in being rest assured that God our creator will provide for all our needs.Matthew 6:26-32
27Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?
29And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.
-
Good Governance
- By solomon2day
- On 10/08/2024
- In Update with Solomon
It is to the knowledge of millions of Nigerians that the basic social-economic institutions have been destroyed.The challenge now is how to fix the nation's health, education, judiciary and other institutions or ensure a satisfactory turn around.
In developed countries, economic activities are the backbone of politics and, as such, distortions or reversal of economic policies or long-term strategic national objectives are rare.
Sadly, little or nothing has been achieved to guarantee a good economic foundation, which ought to be the back-rest of politics.
This is reflected in the awkward power-sharing, power rotation and inequitable distribution of resources and good governance.
The kind of economic reforms by the government would go a long way in determining if Those-in-Charge are neophytes in the Herculean task of governance.
Aiding and Abetting Criminals
For so long, cultists such as one Wolex and Lekan Adewale of 8 Kehinde Aderibigbe steet, Olorunsogo, Molete, Ibadan, Oyo state, Nigeria, have been terrorizing, robbing and attacking innocent Nigerians in the above-mentioned community and so many others. Although the law enforcement agencies feign ignorance, the confidence exuded by the criminals, who have continued to commit heinous and grievous crimes with impunity, exposes the deep involvement of the police in violent crimes, not only in Oyo state but in different parts of the country.
-
The Lord is your keeper
- By solomon2day
- On 10/08/2024
- In Special Report
Let us believe in the constant presence and protection of God. Psalm 121
(A Song of degrees.) I will lift up mine eyes unto the hills, from whence cometh my help.
2My help cometh from the LORD, which made heaven and earth.
3He will not suffer thy foot to be moved: he that keepeth thee will not slumber.
4Behold, he that keepeth Israel shall neither slumber nor sleep.
5The LORD is thy keeper: the LORD is thy shade upon thy right hand.
6The sun shall not smite thee by day, nor the moon by night.
7The LORD shall preserve thee from all evil: he shall preserve thy soul.
-
Appeal Court Judgment 2-Onyendu Ndigbo, Chief Alloy Obi
- By solomon2day
- On 09/08/2024
- In Special Report
evidence led had disclosed the cause of action. He added that the evidence elicited from the defence witness, particularly DW2, showed that as at June, 2010 there was only one person recognized as the Eze Ndigbo or Onyendu of Oyo State and that was Chief Dr, Alex Anozie (1st Claimant); that that confirmed the cause of action of the Respondents. On the claim of Appellants that 1st Appellant was elected and not selected as Onyendu, whereas the Respondents were complaining about the selection of 1st Appellant as Onyendu, Counsel for Respondent cited the case of Marwa Vs Nyako (2012) 6 NWLR (Pt.1269) 199 at 357 to say that:
"An election means the process of
choosing by popular votes a candidate."
He argued that selection is also a process of choosing a candidate and the word election is all embracing and also includes selection. He referred to the finding of the trial Court on Pages 1098 - 1099 of the Records to show that what was clearly in issue was the title of Onyendu Ndigbo, whether the claim of 1st Claimant to the title as being elected by Igbo community Development Association (ICDA), or that of 1st Appellant as being elected by Igbo General Assembly, should stand - that is, the dispute was about the leadership of Igbos in Ibadan and Oyo State, via the title of Onyendu Ndigbo, who was entitled to
Occupy the office.
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. WO. UGWU H.O.D, LITIGATION
1876724
Page 31
He urged us to resolve the Issue against Appellants.
On Issue 2, Counsel said the whole attack by the
Appellants was about the style of and manner by which the trial
Court writes judgment. He said that the style of writing judgment is unique to each Judge. He relied on Ogolo Vs Ogolo (2003) 18 NWLR (Pt.853) 494 at 523-524; Abeje Vs Apeke (2014) ALL FWLR (Pt.715) 376.
In this case, at hand, Counsel said the trial Court made
findings of fact which were not in dispute from the pleadings of
the parties and evidence led, and that was all, as shown on
Pages 1097 to 1098 of the Records. He said that the trial Court
dwelt, extensively, on the facts and evidence before it, as per
the pleadings, in reaching its conclusions; that the decision was
not perverse as alleged by the Appellants. He relied on the case
of Romaine Vs Romaine (1992) LPELR-2953 SC; Belgore Vs Ahmed (2013) 8 NWLR (Pt.1355) 63.
Counsel said the trial Court was right, when it did not
ascribe any probative value to DW2's evidence; that the evidence
wall all fabrication and the witness was economical with the
truth.
Counsel said that the Respondents were entitled to the grant of the 1st and 2nd Reliefs, as they were proved by evidence led by PW1, PW2 and PW3 and corroborated by the DW3 - as
per Page 955 of the Records of Appeal, when he said:
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR, W. O. UGWU H.O.D. L
IGATION
Page 32
"I can see Exhibit 2. It was written by Ohaneze Ndigbo to the 1st Claimant on 31/8/2010 acknowledging him as the only Onyendu Ndigbo of Oyo State. I cannot remember whether there was any election after 31/8/2010 in Oyo State among Igbos."
Counsel said the Respondents were entitled to take benefit
of evidence by the Appellants that supported them
(Respondents). He relied on Gaji Vs Paye 14 NSCQLR (Pt.1)
613.
On Issue 3, Counsel said that Appeal can only lie against a
ratio decidendi of a Court, not against an obiter. He relied on
Section 243(A) of the 1999 Constitution of FRN and the case of
Dalhatu Vs Turaki (2003) 15 NWLR (Pt.843) 310 at 350;
Wilson Vs Osin (1988) 4 NWLR (Pt.88) 324.
Counsel said that the comments of the trial Judge which
Appellants seek to appeal against in ground 9 of the Appeal, vis
a vis, the obiter of the Judge on Ohaneze Ndigbo and the South
East Council of Traditional Rulers, cannot be appealed against.
He also relied on Ngige Vs Obi (2006) ALL FWLR (Pt.330) 1041 at 1141; Buhari Vs Obasanjo (2005) 13 NWLR (Pt.941) 1 at 126-127.
On the Issue of not joining the South East Council of
Traditional Rulers and Ohaneze Ndigbo as parties, but making
orders that affect them, Counsel said the two bodies were aware
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEA IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
Page 33
of the Suit, but preferred to only give evidence on behalf of the parties; that, of the 8 witnesses called by the parties, 3 of them were from the Ohaneze Ndigbo and South East Traditional Rulers Council; that they stood by and watched the parties slug it out. He relied on the case of Ogundiani Vs Araba (1978) 11 NSCC 334, and asserted again that the comments made by the trial Judge against the South East Council of Traditional Rulers and Ohaneze Ndigbo were simply obiter, not ratio decidendi.
On the submission of Appellants that the trial Court did not consider the exhibits tendered by Appellants, Counsel for Respondents said that the exhibits complained of, particularly 21-29, 34-35 were dumped on the Court and the Court has no duty to consider documents dumped on the Court, that it will amount to breach of fair hearing, if the trial Court examined such documents in chamber. He relied on the case of Terab Vs Lawan (1992) 3 NWLR (Pt.231) 569, which requires a party who relies on documents in proof of his case to specifically relate each of such documents to that part of his case in respect of which the document is being tendered.
He urged us to resolve the Issues against Appellants and to dismiss the Appeal.
Appellants file a lengthy bulky Reply Brief which appears to be a rehearse of the entire arguments in the Amended Brief. Of course, a Reply brief can only be justified, where it tackles a new/fresh points of law by Respondent in his brief, which were
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. WO. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
126......
Page 34
not raised in the Appellants' brief or contemplated therein. See
ABC (Transport Company) Ltd Vs Miss Sunmi Omotoye (2019) LPELR-47829 (SC); Adedeji & Ors Vs CBN &
Anor (2022) LPELR-59629 (SC).
RESOLUTION OF ISSUES
I think the real Issues thrown up in this Appeal are two,
namely:
(1) Whether the learned trial Court was seised of jurisdiction to entertain the Suit, considering the issue of locus standi of the Respondents to complain against the election of the 1st Appellant as Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan by the Igbo General Assembly (IGA) and whether they disclosed sufficient cause of action in the circumstances of this
case.
(2) Whether the trial Court was right to hold that 1st Respondent was the Onyendu Ndigbo instead of the 1st Appellant, in the face
face of
of the
intervention and decision of the South East Council of Traditional Rulers and
Ohaneze
Ndigbo
which
intervention/decision the learned trial
Judge greatly deprecated condemned.
I shall take the Two Issues, together.
CA/IB/116/2014
and
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
CAMRUE
BARR. W. O. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
MATE
Page 35
A brief facts of this case at the trial Court, shows that
Appellants and Respondents were all of Igbo extraction living
and doing businesses in Oyo State and they organized
themselves to select or elect their leader or Eze in Ibadan the
(Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State). They however broke up into factions in the cause of selecting their said leader. While the Respondents belonged to a group known as Igbo Community Development Association (ICDA) led by former 1st
Respondent, Dr. Alex Anozie, the Appellants had their group -
Igbo Community of Oyo State (ICOS), led by one Dr. Oramadike.
The former 1st Respondent, (late Dr. Alex Anozie) claimed to have been selected as the Onyendu Ndigbo by the Igbo Community Development Association (ICDA), in 1997 and that the said selection was ratified by the Ohaneze Ndigbo, the umbrella socio-cultural organization of the Igbos. But the Igbo Community of Oyo State (ICOS), led by one Dr. Oramadike did
not accept the claims of Dr. Alex Anozie and ICDA and rather
opted for the 1st Appellant.
The ensuing tussle and crises for the selection of the Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State attracted the
intervention of the South East Council of Traditional Rulers in the year, 2009, July 14th, which resulted in the dissolution of the two
Igbo groups the ICDA and ICOS, along with their leaderships,
-
and Claimants to the title of Onyendu Ndigbo were barred from using it.
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAC IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR, W. O. Uewu
H.O.D. LITIGATION
Page 36
Appellants claimed to have formed another Igbo
organization in Oyo State and Ibadan, called Igbo General
Assembly (IGA), upon the dissolution of the ICDA and ICOS, and
that it was the said Igbo General Assembly that elected the 1st
Appellant as the Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State in
2010.
That election gave rise to this case, as the Respondents sought the order of the Court that 1st Respondent (Dr. Alex
Anozie) remained the recognized Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and
Oyo State, having been elected democratically in 1997, before
the 14/7/2009, when the South East Council of Traditional Rulers
intervened. They also sought orders declaring the steps taken by Appellants towards the selection (of election) of 1st Appellant by 2nd - 6th Defendants contrary to Igbo customs and traditions and contrary to the Constitution of the Ohaneze Ndigbo, and so null and void. They also sought an order to set aside the selection of the 1st Appellant as Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State and to restrain him and the Appellants from parading as the Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State.
The trial Court had agreed with the Plaintiffs (Respondents herein) and made the Orders sought. Hence this Appeal.
I must start by stating the obvious, that by our laws, particularly the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), the right to form an association, and forming of organisations and bodies to pursue any common CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION
CERTIFIED TRUM COPY
BARR, WO. UGWU
LITIGATION
Page 37
lawful interest, is entrenched and where such organisations or
bodies are formed the persons coming together can take
whatever name(s) and leadership they desire, within the
confines of the rules and regulations they give to themselves,
otherwise called - their internal Constitutions.
That is the purport of Section 40 of the Constitution of the
Federal Republic of Nigeria, which states:
"Every person shall be entitled to assemble freely and associate with other persons, and in particular he may form or belong to any political party, trade union or any other association for the protection of his interest; provided that the provisions of this Section shall not derogate from the powers conferred by this Constitution on the Independent National Electoral Commission, with respect to political parties to which that commission does not accord recognition."
I believe all the socio-cultural and ethnic/tribal associations and voluntary organisations derive their existence, relevance and
vibes from this law. In the case of Eronini & Ors Vs Eronini & Ors (2013) LPELR-20651 (CA) my Lord, Abba Aji, JCA (as she then was) stated on the right of individuals to form or join any association, freely, without being forced or coerced, as
follows:
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARK W.GUGWU H.O.G. LITIGATION
Page 38
It is trite that every person resident in Nigeria has a right to go about his or her lawful business unmolested or unhampered by anyone else be it a government functionary or a private individual. Thus, the Court will frawn upon any manifestation of arbitrary power assumed by any person or authority over the life or property of another even if that other is suspected of having breached some law or regulation. People must never take the law into their hands by attempting to enforce what they consider to be their right or entitlement, Per Ikongbeh JCA (of blessed memory) in Nkpa vs. Nkume (2001) 6 NWLR (PT 710) 543 at 560. In fact, in the instant case, the Respondents were being harassed and molested and prevented from lawfully associating with each under a purported authority which the Respondents do not possess. The Appellants should have tackled the situation in a leadership like manner and not show aggrandizement. In his contributory judgment in Nkpa vs. Nkume (Supra) at page 564, Pats Acholonu, JCA said as follows: "Time was when the law governing the native community was force of custom good or bad and whether repugnant or not. Now in the 21st century we are
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION
CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
TRUE
BARR. W. O. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
DATE
1076724...
Page 39
governed by a living law - the Constitution fashioned after the Constitution of older democracies. No one can force or coerce any to join club, society or group that he does not intend or wish to be a member. It is an affront and infraction of the Constitutional right to use old age custom that has now been relegated to morbidity to make one acquiesce or become a member to a body that he or she despises. It is atrophy."
See also the case of Mbanefo Vs Molokwu (2008) LPELR
-
3696 CA, where this Court held in furtherance of the Section 40 of the 1999 Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria that the Court would not ordinarily interfere with decision of voluntary associations. It held:
Agbalanze Onitsha is a voluntary association to which the appellant belonged. It is entitled under its Constitution to decide for itself what it wants and to organize itself and a Court cannot tell such a voluntary association how it must be organized. If any member of such an association does not like its decision it is open to such a member to resign. See Section 6 (c) of Exhibit 'A'. Any society or association, comprising of members who voluntarily join it, is entitled to come to any decision which they like.
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU H.O.D. LIGATION
Page 40
It must be said loud and clear, the party or association or even a club, to which any person belongs is supreme so far as its affairs go. See Macdongal Vs. Gardiner (1875) 1 Ch.D. 13 at 25 per Millish, L.J." Per TSAMIYA,
JCA (P.29, paras. B-E)
Thus, where a voluntary organisation sets out its objectives and goals as per its constitution, the members thereof are bound thereto, and the same objectives and goals or rules of the organisation cannot be forced on non-members of the organisation. Moreover, other voluntary organisations with similar objectives and goals are permitted to operate, within the same space, while ensuring that their aspirations are sought and pursued, peacefully, even if competitively in rival struggle, without endangering the public peace.
And where
where a voluntary organisation or association subordinates itself to another larger or parent body, as per their laws and rules, it cannot defy the orders and directions of the said larger or parent organisation to which it submits to, in my opinion.
In this case, at hand, what appears interesting and intriguing is the fact that both the Respondents and Appellants, in their pleadings and evidence, subordinated their voluntary organisations, which produced their Leaders and the Eze, known as "Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State" to some
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION
CERTIFIED TRUE/COPY
TRUEL C
BARR. W. O. UGWU
H.O.D. UTICATION
107.6724
DATE.....
Page 41
larger or parent organisations namely the South-East Council of Traditional Rulers and Ohaneze Ndigbo, and they looked forward to being guided, directed, and their decisions ratified or
sanctioned by the said South-East Council of Traditional Rulers and Ohaneze Ndigbo.
In their pleadings and reliefs sought and even evidence led,
the Respondents (as Claimants) clearly disclosed their romance
and obeysance to the customs and traditions of the Igbos
(which, of course, are custodied by the South-East Council of Traditional Rulers, and also sought the protection of Ohaneze Ndigbo as the umbrella organisation of all people of Igbo
extraction, world-wide.
For instance, in their Relief one, Respondents, in asserting
their right as Igbo Community Development Association (ICDA),
to produce the Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State, alleged that they democratically election of 1st Respondent (Dr.
Alex Anozie) in 1997, "subsequent ratification of the
election swearing-in and authority of the 1st Claimant
(was done) (was given) by the Ohaneze Ndigbo in the
year 2000."
In Relief 3, Respondents sought a Declaration that all
acts and steps taken by the Defendants towards the
selection and proposed installation of the 1st Defendant by the 2nd to 6th Defendants are contrary to Igbo
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
Page 42
Customs and Traditions and the Constitution of Ohaneze Ndigbo and is therefore null and void."
Relief 4, sought "An Order setting aside all steps and acts done by the Defendants towards the selection and proposed installation of the 1st Defendant as the Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State."
Reliefs 5 and 6, sought orders of injunctions restraining the 1st Defendant and the Defendants from parading as the Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State.
Of course, the above reliefs appear to have acknowledged the election of 1st Appellant as Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State by Igbo General Assembly, and so sought Court order to declare the acts and steps taken towards the selection (or election) of 1st Appellant and his proposed installation a nullity as well as setting aside the said acts and steps of selection and installation of 1st Appellant as the Onyendu Ndigbo.
What the Reliefs also tried to establish was the facts that both the Ohaneze Ndigbo and Igbo Customs and Traditions supported their cause, having ratified 1st Respondent's election in 2000! The above deductions are my understanding of the claims and reliefs of the Respondents, as Claimants.
Sadly, in their pleadings and evidence, the Respondents rather presented the Appellants (and the 1st Appellant) as those
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. o. UoWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
jet
Page 43
enjoying the sympathy and support of the South-East Council of Traditional Rulers and of the Ohaneze Ndigbo, placing themselves and 1st Respondent at a disadvantage! Thus, Respondents were fighting the very people
people (parent organisations) they (Respondents) tauted/claimed as their
witnesses!
They (Respondents) led evidence against themselves (evidence against interest) and caused the trial Court to make several scathing remarks against the said parent organisations (South-East Council of Traditional Rulers and Ohaneze Ndigbo) depreciating their role and questioning their powers and authority over the Respondents!
For instance, the Respondents themselves led evidence to show that the South-East Council of Traditional Rulers issued Exhibit 33, which dissolved the organisation (ICDA) that produced the 1st Respondent as Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State and also dissolved the rival organisation (ICOS), with effect from 14/7/2009, but they later ratified the election of 1st Appellant by the Igbo General Assembly (IGA), as the Onyendu Ndigbo!
The Respondents had pleaded that they were not part of the Igbo General Assembly (IGA) that elected the 1st Appellant as Onyendu Ndigbo; they also said that they had earlier applied (as ICDA) and became affiliate of Ohaneze Ndigbo in the year,
2000 and were duly recognized. But that, sometimes about
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED PRUE COPY
Amb
BARR. W. 9. UGWU H.O.D., LITIGATION
DATE...
10767 244
Page 44
May, 2010, the Appellants came together, under the name "Igbo General Assembly" and stated that they have elected one Chief Alloy Obi (the 1st Defendant) as the Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State." (See Paragraphs 10, 12 and 22 of the Pleadings of Respondents).
The Respondents had led evidence on the above pleadings. On Pages 844-845 of the Records of Appeal. The PW2 (Chief Ndidi Emmanuel Nzeakor) said, under cross examination:
"I was the President of ICDA in Oyo State before it metamorphosed into Ohaneze Ndigbo. ICDA is no longer in existence... I am aware that before now there was another Igbo body known Igbo Community, Oyo State (i.e.) ICOS. They were in existence with the ICDA before they became moribund. I don't know when the ICOS ceases (sic) to exist. I only knew that they became dead, at a certain time. I was never a member of ICOS. ICOS then had an Eze known as Oramadike. I was in Ibadan when the South-East Council of Traditional Rulers came to Ibadan on 14/7/2009. I was part of the team that received the Traditional Rulers at the Toll Gate. I followed the Traditional Rulers to the Palace of Olubadan of Ibadan land. I was also with the team at the office of the
Deputy Governor. I was at Mokola,
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION
CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR W. O. UGWU
H.O.D. MITIGATION
Page 45
when the South East Council of Traditional Rulers addressed the Igbos... The 1st Claimant said the closing prayer on that day. The Imo (sic) bodies of ICDA and ICOS were not proscribed on that day. The Traditional Rulers on that day did ban both 1st Claimant and Oramadike from further answering the name Eze. The ICDA however, disagreed with the South East Council of Traditional Rulers on that day and protested. We told them that they have no powers to proscribe us, because they have no power over us... I am the president of Ohaneze Ndigbo, Oyo State. The Ohaneze Ndigbo Oyo State have (sic) its own Constitution Ohaneze Ndigbo at the National Level also have (sic) its own Constitution. The National body Constitution is superior to that of our own at the State Level. Ohaneze Ndigbo is the mouth piece of the Igbos all over the world. I don't (sic) know the mission of South East Traditional Rulers, when they came to Oyo State..."
The PW3 (DR. Alex Anozie) had said, under cross examination:
"... I am aware of the fact that some South East Council of Traditional Rulers member came to Oyo State. The
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE/COPY
Page 46
BARR.
UGWU
people who came said that they came to represent the South East Council of Traditional Rulers... I met them at the Ibadan End Toll Gate. The Chairman of the delegation asked me to follow them to everywhere they went to. He is by name Illomuanya... They announced there that they had come to change the title of Eze Ndigbo to Onyendu Ndigbo. They gave some people room to talk..." (Page 893 of the Records)
On Page 895, PW3 said:
"... The Traditional Ruler (sic) came to Oyo State in order to announce the change of title Eze Ndigbo to Onyendu Ndigbo like they did in other Slate (sic) but went on to add the issue of banning of Igbo Associations. We have (sic) taking instructions from Ohaneze Ndigbo before and complied with it. We have never taken instruction from the Council of Traditional Rulers. The one they gave, we rejected it..."
On Pages 898 to 899 of the Records, PW3 said:
"In the past 16 years, the Igbos in Ibadan has (sic) had Leadership tussle in Ibadan. There has been no crises. After the visit of the Traditional Rulers, I attended a meeting of a panel set up by the Ohaneze Ndigbo in Enugu to
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
Page 47
look into the Leadership tussle in Oyo State. During the meeting, we notice (sic) bias and I told them that if I don't get justice from the meeting/panel, I will go to Court to seek redress. The bias I notice was that the Igbo tradition of breaking kolanut was supposed to be done by elder was given to a person, who is junior to me in age... They later sent a letter to us and said that they agreed with what the Traditional Rulers came to do. We protested in writing to them that we did not agreed (sic) to their decision... Kolanut breaking is an exclusive entitlement of most elderly person in Igbo land. Unless you are a King, the fact that you are a Chieftaincy title holder will not give you the privilege. I
am still a member of Ohaneze Ndigbo."
The above evidence clearly revealed that the very parent organisation (Ohaneze Ndigbo and Traditional Rulers) which the Respondents sought to rely on to establish their case, were presented as adversaries of their (Respondents) cause. And the evidence presented by the leaders of the said parent organisations were not favourable to the Respondents, either.
And so, the DW2, Chairman of the South-East Council of Traditional Rulers (Eze (Dr.) C.I. Illomuanya CON) was heavily fought by the Respondents, when he was to give evidence as they (Respondents) objected to his testifying in Court, but the
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W.Q. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
1576734
Page 48
trial Court overruled the objection. He testified, under a subpoena. Under cross examination he said, on Page 948 of the Records:
"... The Council directed that the two warring factions should be suspended and the State Leaders should take over to organize credible elections. An election was conducted and the winner (i.e.) the 1st Defendant was brought to the meeting of the Council that was held in Akwa (sic) Anambra State and introduced to the Council. The Council asked them to go so that it could find out whether due process was observed in the election of the 1st Defendant. When the Council found out that the election was properly carried out, the Council wrote to the 1st Defendant to confirm his election... The Council later came to confer the title on the 1st Defendant. Nobody objected to the resolution of the Council... The 1st Claimant said the closing prayer on that date."
DW3, one Chief Chinkwe Ndimele, said he testified, having been directed by the President - General of Ohaneze Ndigbo, who (was subpoenaed) to testify. He (DW3) National Vice President General of the Ohaneze Ndigbo, told the Court:
"I know the 1st Claimant and the 1st
Defendant. I know (sic) them when the
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU
O.D. LITIGATION
Page 49
Ohaneze Ndigbo set up an adhoc Committee to look into the reported leadership crisis in Oyo State, Igbo Community. I was a member of the Committee. We came out with Exhibit 33 as our resolution. I know Eze Illomuanya. He is the Chairman of the South Easter (sic) States of Ndi Ezes (i.e. Traditional Rulers). In his capacity as the Chairman of the Traditional Council in the South East, Eze Illomuanya is also the Chairman of Ime-Obi (i.e. the Highest Governing body of Ohaneze Ndigbo)..." (See Page 953 of the Records).
Crossed examined by Counsel for 4th to 5th Defendants (Mr. Adigo), DW3 said:
"The National Executive of Ohaneze Ndigbo will always look into the appointment of Onyendu Ndigbo in the States outside the South East of Nigeria. The candidates will be presented to the Ime-Obi and after their ratification, the Chairman of the Ime-Obi will then go and install in that State. The Chairman of the Traditional Council first came down to see the level of domain in Oyo State, he then went back to report to the Ohaneze Ndigbo. It was after the deliberations that he was given the go-ahead to go
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL
IBADAN DIVISION
CERTIFIED RUE COPY
BARR. W.O.UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
Page 50
and dissolve the Oyo State Council."
(See Pages 953-954 of the Records)
I had earlier reproduced the Resolution of the South East Council of Traditional Rulers - Exhibit 33, in this Judgment:
(1) That the intervention of the South East Council of Traditional Rulers in the lingering leadership tussle within the Igbo Community in Ibadan, Oyo State on the 14th of July, 2009 was in order. (2) That the dissolution of the Igbo Community Development Association (ICDA) and Igbo Community of Oyo State (ICOS) along with their leadership by the South East Council of Traditional Rulers was the best interest of the Igbo Community.
(3) That since the subsequent election on the 18th of May, 2010 to elect a leader by the Igbo Community was properly advertised and brought to the notice of the Oyo State Government and the Police/SSS, the outcome of the election is valid and upheld.
(4) That Chief Aloy Obi is recognized as ONYENDU NDIGBO IN Ibadan and Oyo State.
(5) That this decision supercedes all earlier correspondents by Ohaneze Ndigbo on this matter..."
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. Q. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
ATE....
Page 51
The above pieces of evidence from both sides clearly put the Claimants (Respondents) in serious difficulties, in my view, to prove their declaratory reliefs. By law, the Claimants has the task of establishing his case on the strength of his evidence, and cannot rely on the weakness of the defence, if any, though he can take advantage of admission(s) by the defence, that supports his (Claimant's) cause. See the case of Isa Vs APC & Ors (2023) LPELR-60150 (SC); Ani & Ors Vs Otu & Ors (2023) LPELR-59602 (SC); Luke Vs RSHPDA & Ors (2022) LPELR-57580 (SC).
With all that transpired, resulting in the dissolution of the two rival bodies of Ndigbo in Oyo State, namely the Igbo Community Development Association (ICDA) and the Igbo Community, Oyo State (ICOS) and the suspension of the rival Claimants to the title of Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State by the decision of the South-East Council of Traditional Rulers, which was ratified by the Ohaneze Ndigbo, and the subsequent election of the 1st Appellant as the Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State by Igbo General Assembly (IGA), which election the 1st Respondent did not take part, but came to Court to pray the Court to set aside and nullify, I find it difficult to locate the locus standi of the 1st Respondent to challenge an election of 1st Appellant by a group, he (1st Respondent) was not a member of and which election he (1st Respondent) did not contest, simply because his group (ICDA) had problems with the
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE/COPY
BARR. W. O, UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
101.67.24
Page 52
decision of his parent organisation (Ohaneze Ndigbo and South- East Council of Traditional Rulers) concerning him and his earlier selection as the Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State!
It appears to me that the Respondents sued the wrong persons (Appellants) instead of those they really had issues with, South-East Council of Traditional Rulers and Ohaneze Ndigbo. Thus, I cannot see any cause of action disclosed against the Appellants, since the Respondents were not members of the Igbo General Assembly (IGA) that elected 1st Appellant and 1st Respondent did not take part in the election which produced the 1st Appellant as the Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State.
On Page 827 of the Records, the 1st Respondent had said:
"I did not contest any election within Igbo General Assembly."
A person is said to have locus standi to sue, where his legal right/interest in a given transaction can be ascertained and he is competent to file the Suit - that is he disclosed the legal capacity or standing to sue in the cause. See Opobiyi & Anor Vs Amuniru (2011) LPELR-8232 SC; PDP Vs INEC & Ors (2023) LPELR-60457 (SC). Locus standi is closely linked with cause of action, which is a legally viable complaint which a Court can entertain and give remedy on. See Atiba Iyalamu Savings and Loans Ltd Vs Suberu & Anor (2018) LPELR- 44069 (SC), where the Supreme Court held:
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. O, UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
Page 53
In Bello Vs A.G. Oyo State (1986) 5 NWLR (pt.45) 828 @ 876 A B this Court considered what constitutes a reasonable cause of action. His Lordship Karibi-Whyte, JSC opined thus: "I think a cause of action is constituted by the bundle or aggregate of facts which the law will recognise as giving the plaintiff a substantive right to make the claim against the relief or remedy being sought. Thus, the factual situation on which the plaintiff relies to support his claim must be recognised by the law as giving rise to a substantive right capable of being claimed or enforced against the defendant. In other words, the factual situation relied upon must constitute the essential ingredients of an enforceable right or claim." This definition was adopted by Obaseki, JSC in Afolayan Vs Ogunrinde (1990) 1 NWLR (pt.127) 269 @ 382 F - H. His Lordship stated: "In its simplest terms, I would say that a cause of action means: (1) a cause of complaint; (2) a civil right or
or obligation fit for determination by a Court of law; (3) a dispute in respect of which a Court of law is entitled to invoke its judicial powers to determine. It consists of every fact which it would be necessary for the plaintiff to prove, if traversed,
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL
IBADAN DIVISION
CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU
H.O.D. LITIGATION
DATE...
Page 54
in order to support his right to judgment." See also: Thomas Vs Olufosoye (1986) 1 NWLR (pt.18) 669; Adimora vs. Ajufo (1988) NSCC Vol. 19 (Part) 1003 @ 1005; (1988) 3 NWLR (Pt. 80) 1; P.N Udoh Trading Co. Ltd vs. Abere (2001) 11 NWLR (Pt. 723) 114 @ 129 B - C; Mobil Producing Nig. Unltd vs. LASEPA & Ors. (2002) 18 NWLR (Pt. 798) 1 @ 30 E G." Per KEKERE-EKUN, JSC (Pp. 43-45, paras. F-B)
-
I therefore find it quite strange, that the trial Judge rather picked serious quarrel with the South-East Council of Traditional Rulers and Ohaneze Ndigbo, over their role in denying the 1st Respondent his title and/or suspending him and his organisation (ICDA) and allegedly replacing him with the 1st Appellant, and so granted the reliefs sought by the Respondents, whereas the Suit was not against the said two parent bodies! The trial Court had observed on Pages 1104 to 1105 of the Records, thus:
"But one thing that is abundantly clear, both from the pleadings and evidence of all the parties to this action is that the purported dissolution of ICDA and removal of the 1st Claimant was not carried out by members of the ICDA, but by the chairman of the South East Council of Traditional Rulers." Yet neither that Council nor Dr. Ilomuanya was joined..."
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
DATE 17.
Page 55
The trial Court appeared to have shifted the burden of
proof to the Appellants (Defendants), when he held that the
Defendants failed to establish the capacity or locus standi of the
South-East Council of Traditional Rulers to unilaterally dissolve
and in commando manner remove the 1st Claimant as the
Onyendu Ndigbo, and the said acts ratified by the Ohaneze
Ndigbo! The trial Court therefore refused to confer legitimacy on
such acts, in the absence of evidence (according to it) to
establish constitutionality of their actions. See Pages 1108 to
1109 of the Records of Appeal.
The trial Court was wrong, in my opinion, to require the
Appellants (as Defendants) to lead evidence to establish the
locus standi and constitutional powers of the South East Council
of Traditional Rulers and Ohaneze Ndigbo to exercise such
powers and authority, when evidence by the Respondents (and
also Appellants) had demonstrated that the two sides pledged
loyalty to the said parent bodies, and the Respondents (as
Claimants) had even cited the said bodies, particularly Ohaneze Ndigbo, as the source of the legitimacy of 1st Respondent's
election as Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State!
I think, the said findings of the trial Court were perverse and contrary to the evidence adduced. I also think the trial Court
was unduly hard and harsh on the Council of Traditional Rulers
and Ohaneze Ndigbo, and I consider the said scathing remarks of the trial Judge on the two parent organisations offensive and
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAR IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. Q. UGWU H.O.D., LITIGATION
Page 56
condescending. See the case of Edun & Anor Vs FRN (2019)
SC.960/2019 on perverse findings:
The holding of the Court below quoted above is perverse as it is against the trend of evidence on record. See Nobis- Elendu v INEC (2015) All FWLR (Pt.812) 1505 at 1536, Akpata v Ugo (2007) All FWLR (Pt.349) 1203 at 1211. Being a perverse holding which influenced and or determined the final conclusion of the Court below, the appellant prays the Court to set aside the perverse holding and reverse the conclusion and decision of the Court below and allow this appeal. See Odom v PDP (2015) All FWLR (Pt.773) 1962) at 1984-1985. The testing of the veracity of Exhibits 1044 against other available evidence, Exhibits 10-14 cannot be taken as a clear, positive and unequivocal admission by the appellant of the commission of the offence of criminal misappropriation of money meant for execution of the contract. The Court below was therefore in error to have affirmed the decision of the trial Court which treated Exhibits 10-14 as admission of commission of the offence charged and the conviction of the appellant solely on the basis of Exhibits 10-14 and the decision is liable to be set aside. I rely
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISJON CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. Q. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
17724
Page 57
on Idowu v State (1998) 11 NWLR
(Pt.574) 354 at 363." Per PETER- ODILI, JSC (PP. 44-45, para B)
I see merit in this Appeal and resolve the Issues for Appellants and allow the Appeal. I set aside the decision of the
trial Court and dismiss the Suit. I make no order as to cost as parties are to bear their respective costs.
Mlbaja
ITA G. MBABA
JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL
COUNSEL:
APPELLANTS:
ALHAJI A. LASUN SANUSI, SAN with him CHIEF ADEMOLA ADEDEJI and A.O. AKINTOYE ESQ
RESPONDENTS:
IBRAHIM A. KAREM-OJO ESQ with him O.G. OLURANLE
ESQ
13409600 COURT OF APPEAL
CASHIER 10 JUN 2024 SIGN
BADAN
A
10 JUN 2024
CTC-100
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR, W. O. UGWU
H.O.D LITIGATION
DATE......
CA/IB/116/2014
Page 58
APPEAL NO.: CA/IB/116/2014 MOHAMMED DANJUMA, JCA
I have had the privilege of reading in draft, the lead judgment of my learned brother ITA G. MBABA, JCA (OFR). I agree with the reasoning and conclusion that this appeal succeed and is hereby allowed. I abide by all the consequential orders in the lead judgment.
пя
HON. JUSTICE MOHAMMED DANJUMA JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
א.
BARR. W. O. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION DATE
Page 59
CA/IB/116/2014
HADIZA RABIU SHAGARI
I have read the judgment of my learned brother ITA GEORGE MBABA, PJCA, OFR. I have nothing to add to his conclusion.
I also agree with his reasoning that there is merit in the Appeal and it is allowed by me and I also set aside the decision of the trial Court and dismiss the Suit.
Двери
HADIZA RABIU-SHAGARI Justice, Court of Appeal
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
HARR, WO UGWU
ODIGATION
Dart
10/6/224
CA/IB/116/2014
Page 60
-
Great Joy
- By solomon2day
- On 07/08/2024
- In Special Report
There is great joy in doing the will of God. Psalm 1
2But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.
4The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.
6For the LORD knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish.
-
Shun Idol Worship
- By solomon2day
- On 05/08/2024
- In Special Report
Lord our God fill our hearts with gratitude and help us to live more simply, so that others may simply live. Hosea 8:1-14
2Israel shall cry unto me, My God, we know thee.
3Israel hath cast off the thing that is good: the enemy shall pursue him.
8Israel is swallowed up: now shall they be among the Gentiles as a vessel wherein is no pleasure.
9For they are gone up to Assyria, a wild ass alone by himself: Ephraim hath hired lovers.
11Because Ephraim hath made many altars to sin, altars shall be unto him to sin.
12I have written to him the great things of my law, but they were counted as a strange thing.
-
Education in a Democracy
- By solomon2day
- On 05/08/2024
- In Update with Solomon
The future seems bleak for children and the youth in Nigeria as the cost of education at all levels goes beyond reach. The leadership at all levels may not be sensitive to the difficulties the citizens are passing through to meet the increasing cost of education.
Sadly, the children of these leaders are in choice schools around the globe.
Democracy ensures that citizens have access to uninhibited and quality education.
But in this case, the cost of education may not justify the service delivery in the education sector.
-
Appeal Court Judgment-Onyendu Ndigbo, Chief Alloy Obi
- By solomon2day
- On 05/08/2024
- In Special Report
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NIGERIA IBADAN JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT IBADAN
ON FRIDAY THE 31ST DAY OF MAY, 2024
BEFORE THEIR LORDSHIPS:
HON. JUSTICE M. DANUMA
HON. JUSTICE ITA.G. MBABA (PJ), OFR
JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL
JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL - JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL
HON. JUSTICE H. R. SHAGARI
APPEAL NO: CA/IB/116/2014
BETWEEN:
1. CHIEF ALLOY OKWUDILICHUKWU OBI
2. MR. ADOLF OKOLI
3. CHIEF GILBERT IHESULO
4. MR. ANDREW DURU
5. MR. JOHN IDOKO
6. MR. FELIX IGBOANUGA
AND
1. CHIEF JOSEPH NWIHWE
(Substituted for Late Dr. Alex Anozie by Order of this Honourable Court made on 18th March, 2024)
2. CHIEF NDIDI E. NZEAKO
(For himself and on behalf of Ohaneze
Ndigbo of Oyo State)
- APPELLANTS
= RESPONDENTS
JUDGMENT
(DELIVERED BY ITA G. MBABA, JCA, OFR)
This Appeal emanated from the Judgment of Oyo State High Court in Suit No. 1/167/2011, delivered on 18th February,
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
Page 1
2014, by Hon. Justice M.A.A. Abass, wherein the trial Judge granted all the claims of the Claimants (now Respondents)
At the trial, the Respondents had sought the following reliefs:
1. Declaration that the 1st Claimant is the
subsisting and the Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan land and Ovo State, having been democratically elected and sworn into office by the Igbo Community Development Association in 1997 and the subsequent ratification of the election, swearing-in and authority of the 1st Claimant by the Ohanaeze Ndigbo in the year 2000.
2. Declaration that there can and only be one Onyendu Ndigbo for one Community and that and only the 1st Claimant Alex Anozie is the Onyendu Ndigbo for Ibadan land and Oyo State having been duly proclaimed as such by the Igbo Communities in Oyo State, vide their communique issued on30th September, 2000.
3. Declaration that all acts and steps taken by the Defendants towards the selection and proposed installation of the 1st Defendant by the 2nd to 6th Defendant are contrary to Igbo customs and traditions and the Constitution of Ohanaeze Ndigbo and is therefore null and void.
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU
H.O.D. L
MATE
ICATION
17.724
Page 2
4. An Order setting aside all steps and acts done by the Defendants towards the selection and proposed installation of the 1st Defendant as the Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State.
5. An Injunction restraining the Defendants whether by themselves, their servants, agents and or privies otherwise from installing the 1st Defendant as Onyendu of Ibadan and Oyo State.
6. An Order of injunction restraining the 1st Defendant from pronouncing and
parading himself as the Onyendu Ndigbo for Ibadan and Oyo State. (See Pages 20 of the Records of Appeal)
Appellants (as Defendants) had opposed the claim and after hearing the case and considering the evidence and addresses of Counsel, the trial Court held for the Claimants (Respondents) and said:
The 1st claimant is clearly aggrieved over his purported removal as the Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State and the purported installation of the 1st defendant in his place. The evidence of CW1, CW2, CW3 and CW4 are clearly pointing to the fact that there is no basis whatsoever for the South East Council of Traditional Rulers actions and that the said Council possesses no power to act in the way they did. The defence of
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
Othm
BARR. W. O. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
Page 3
the defendants as epitomized by the testimonies of DW1, DW2, DW3 and DW4 is simply that the South East Council of Traditional Rulers acted the way they did because of a perceived rivalry between the ICDA and another group led by Chief Oramadike. The defendants did not however place any material before the court to show where the said South East Council of Traditional
Rulers derived their power to dissolve/proscribe the ICDA and to remove or dethrone the 1st claimant by mere pronouncement at the gathering of the 14th of July, 2009. The defendants did not also produce any evidence to the effect that the South East Council of Traditional Rulers was a party to the formation of ICDA or its parent body (i.e. the Ohaneze Ndigbo) which will now give them (the Council) the power of life or death over the ICDA and its operatives and structures to the extent of the arrogation of the power of declaration of an association of individuals formed many years before dissolved within few hours or minutes of a day gathering.
The picture painted by the defendants of the extent of the powers of the South East Council of Traditional Rulers on matters that concern the interest of association of matured men of which
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL
IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR, W. O. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
Page 4
they never took part in their formation nor were they members is the type that will find no place in a just and egalitarian society where the Rule of Law and respect for human conduct and the right to free association of citizens as enshrine in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is guaranteed. The defendants also gave evidence to the effect that the actions of the South East Council of Traditional Rulers was aimed at ensuring lasting peace among the Igbos resident in Ibadan and Oyo State, but I hasten to say that the procedure adopted by the chairman of the Council in dissolving the ICDA and removing the 1st claimant as the Onyendu Ndigbo by pronouncement at a gathering may be quick and convenient and time saving, but the dictates of justice demands that the legal principle of audi alter an partem must be obeyed no matter how cumbersome and inconvenient it may appear to the council.
See OLANIYAN VS
mere
UNIVERSITY OF
LAGOS (1985) 2 NWLR (Pt. 9) 599.
I think it is oppressive for the chairman of the South East Council of Traditional Rulers to ask for the mobilization of all sons and daughters of Igbo extraction which included the claimants to receive him and his entourage during a visit to
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE/COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
Page 5
Ibadan through Exhibit19,onlytousethe same forum to humiliate the claimants by announcing the dissolution of the association to which they belong and removing the 1st claimant by mere pronouncement from his exalted position, thereby paving way for the emergence of the 1st defendant as the Onyendu Ndigbo in place of the claimant. The 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is an important document. It sets out regulations for the organic and systematic ordering of the public and private affairs of citizens of Nigeria. It also protects their private rights. It was designed to ensure that the rights of the citizens are not trampled upon or taken away without reparation. Its provisions are strong and elastic enough to protect rights which had accrued before or after the
Constitution came into force.
See DR. (MRS.) RANSOME-KUTI VS AG (1985) (Pt. 16) 211 WOMILOJU VS ANIBIRE (2010) 10 NWLR (Pr. 1203) 545.
In the light of the above, I hold that the 1st claimant has a right to challenge the election and inauguration of the 1st defendant as the Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State. Issue No. 3 is resolved in favour of the claimants.
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL
IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
Page 6
Having resolved the three issues for the determination of this case in favour of the claimants, I hold that the claimant's claims succeeds. I accordingly grant the following reliefs being claimed by the claimants in paragraph 22 of the Amended Statement of claim dated the 2nd of February, 2012 and filed on the same date.
That is, the following reliefs claimed by the claimants are hereby granted:
"(i) Declaration that the 1st claimant is the subsisting and the Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan land and Oyo State, having been democratically elected and sworn into office by the Igbo Community Development Association in 1997 and authority of the 1st claimant by the Ohaneze Ndigbo in the year 2000.
ii. Declaration that there can only be one "Onyendu Ndigbo" for one community and the 1st claimant - Alex Anozie is the Onyendu Ndigbo for Ibadan land and Oyo State having been duly proclaimed as such by the Igbo communities in Oyo State vide their MA. ARTSOKAMUITO communique issued on 30th September, 2000.
iii. Declaration that all acts and steps taken by the Defendants towards the selection and installation of the 1st defendant by the 2nd to 6th defendant contrary to Igbo customs and traditions
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
mk
BARR. WO. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
Page 7
and the Constitution of Ohanaeze Ndigbo
and is therefore null and void.
That is the Judgment Appellants appealed against, as per the Amended Notice of Appeal filed on 14/05/2015. See Pages 1147 1153 of the Supplementary Records of Appeal, transmitted to this Court on 22/7/16 and deemed duly done on 9/11/2017.
Appellants filed Amended Brief of arguments on 28/3/2024, wherein they distilled three (3) Issues for the determination of the Appeal, as follows:
(1) Whether the learned trial Judge of the Court below was not wrong and acted in excess of jurisdiction when he entertained and adjudicated in the suit when the Claimants lack (sic) locus standi to institute the action as the claims disclose (sic) no cause of action and not properly constituted necessary parties were not joined or sued. (Grounds 10, 11 and 12)
as
(2) Whether the learned trial Judge was not wrong in predicating his decision on perverse findings which lack (sic) support from the evidence on record, thereby engendering serious miscarriage of justice. (Grounds 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 13)
(3) Whether the learned trial Judge did not violate the constitutional rights to fair
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION
CERTIFIED TRUE/COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
Page 8
hearing of the Appellants when he failed to consider relevant documents tendered and gave judgment against the Appellants on the basis of findings and holdings made against Ohanaeze Ndigbo and the Council of South East Traditional Rulers, who are (sic) not parties in the case, which holdings and decisions engendered serious miscarriage of justice, unjust, unconstitutional, null and
void. (Grounds 7, 8 and 9)
The Respondents filed their brief on 2/5/2024 and distilled three (3) Issues, too, for determination of the Appeal, as follows:
(1) Whether the learned trial Judge was right when he entertained and granted the claims of the Respondents, in view of the pleadings and evidence before the Court. (Grounds 10, 11 and 12)
(2) Whether there was a careful appraisal of evidence by the Court and the trial Judge is (sic) right in his judgment considering the evidence placed before the Court. (Grounds 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 13)
(3) Whether there was a breach of right of fair hearing by the trial Judge in the conduct of the case at trial. (Grounds 7, 8 and 9)
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. WO. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
Page. 9
Appellants file a Reply Brief, today (6/5/2024) (which they styled "Appellants Consequential Amended Reply Brief of
Argument" to react to the Respondents' Brief.
Arguing the Appeal, Appellants' Counsel, Alhaji A. Lasun
Sanusi, SAN, with him Chief Ademola Adeniji and A.O.
Akintoye Esq, on Issue 1, said that the Suit was not properly
constituted with necessary parties; that Respondents disclosed
no cause of action consequent upon which there was want of
locus standi, and so the trial Court was robbed of jurisdiction to
hear the case.
Counsel referred to the 1st Relief sought by the
Respondents to say that the same acknowledged that late Dr. Alex Anozie (former 1st Respondent) was the Onyendu Ndigbo of
Ibadan and Oyo State elected and sworn in by the Igbo
Community Development Association (ICDA) in 1997, which was
a rival group to Igbo Community of Oyo State (ICOS), under the
leadership of one Doctor Oramadike; that it was evident that the reliefs by the late Dr. Alex Anozie (1st Respondent) to exercise
control over his Igbo Community Development Association
(ICDA) was subject to ratification and authority of the Ohaneze
Ndigbo, which is the overall authority for all people of Igbo
extraction, world-wide, to which ICDA was affiliated. He
(Counsel) argued that the Respondents had also acknowledged the emergence of 1st Appellant too, as the Onyendu Ndigbo of
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE/COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
Page 10
Oyo State, but sought to nullify the 1st Appellant's Selection (See Reliefs 3 and 4 by the Respondents)
Counsel argued that there was no selection or steps towards selection of 1st Respondent, but that 1st Appellant was enthroned by election under IGA; that the steps taken towards election of the 1st Appellant were after the dissolution ICDA and ICOS by South East Traditional Rulers and Ohaneze, following his election by Igbo General Assembly; that the fact that both South East Council of Traditional Rulers and Ohaneze Ndigbo and I.G.A
were not joined to the case was fatal to the Suit. Counsel
referred us to the Exhibit 33 - a letter of the Ohaneze Ndigbo to the Oyo State Governor dated 10th December, 2010 (See Pages 756 of the Records of Appeal - Vol. 2), confirming the dissolution of "Igbo Community Development Association" (ICDA) and Igbo Community of Oyo State (ICOS) among other issues; Counsel said it was resolved in the Exhibit 33, and stated as follows:
(1) That the intervention of the South East Council of Traditional Rulers in the lingering leadership tussle within the Igbo Community in Ibadan, Oyo State on the 14th of July, 2009 was in order.
(2) That the dissolution of the Igbo Community Development Association (ICDA) and Igbo Community of Oyo State (ICOS) along with their leadership by the South East Council of Traditional
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL
IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. D. UGWU
H.O.D. LITI
Page 11
Rulers was the best interest of the Igbo Community.
(3) That since the subsequent election on the 18th of May, 2010 to elect a leader by the Igbo Community was properly advertised and brought to the notice of the Oyo State Government and the Police/SSS, the outcome of the election is valid and upheld.
(4)
(5)
That Chief Aloy Obi is recognized as ONYENDU NDIGBO IN Ibadan and Oyo State.
That this decision supercedes all earlier correspondents by Ohaneze Ndigbo on this matter..."
Appellants' Counsel expressed no doubt that the
Respondents were conscious of the fact that their Association
(ICDA) had been proscribed by the South East Council of
Traditional Rulers, just as the ICOS, and the said decisions were ratified by the Ohaneze Ndigbo. Counsel referred us to
Paragraph 11 of the Reply by the Respondents to Defendants'
Statement of Defence (Page 824 of the Records), where Respondents contested the power of the Igbo Traditional Rulers Council South East to dissolve ICDA Ibadan and to cancel the selection of 1st Respondent as the Onyendu Ndigbo Council and Counsel added that the proscription of ICDA and ICOS was never challenged in any Court. He said that DW4, who was a member of ICDA, during cross examination, admitted the decision of the
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEA IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
1.07.17.244.
Page 12
South East Council of Traditional Rulers on the dissolution of the ICDA and ICOS- Page 957 of the Records - that "after the dissolution of the two former groups, there came up the Igbo General Assembly (IGA)."
Counsel said that the election by Igbo General Assembly (IGA), which led to the emergence of 1st Appellant as Onyendu of Ibadan and Oyo State was conducted by Igbo General Assembly, which was also not joined as a party to the Suit either by itself or through its officials. Thus, Counsel said the necessary parties, the South East Council of Traditional Rulers and Ohaneze Ndigbo, were not joined in the suit, neither was the Igbo General Assembly (IGA), being the body that conducted the election that produced the 1st Appellant as Onyendu; he said that failure to join those necessary parties robbed the trial Court of jurisdiction. He relied on the case of Mbanefo Vs Molokwu (2014) 6 NWLR (Pt.1403) 377 at 410; Bakare Vs Ajose Adeogun (2014) 6 NWLR (Pt.1403) 320 at 359.
Counsel added that the absence of the South East Council of Traditional Rulers and Ohaneze Ndigbo who dissolved the ICDA and ICOS and of the IGA (Igbo General Assembly) which conducted the election that brought about the 1st Appellant as Onyendu was fatal to be case of Respondents, especially as the Respondents had founded on role of and powers and authority of the Ohaneze Ndigbo in the ratification of selection/election of Onyendu Ndigbo. (See Reliefs 1 and 3 of the Respondents).
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU
H.O.D. LITIGATION
Page 13
Counsel also argued that the Respondents lacked locus standi to bring the Suit as the election of the 1st Appellant, being
challenged by them, was conducted by Igbo General Assembly
(IGA) after the dissolution of the Igbo Community Development Association (ICDA) and Igbo Community Oyo State (ICOS) by
the South East Council of Traditional Rulers, and Ohaneze
Ndigbo. He argued that the Respondents were not members of
the Igbo General Assembly and did not take part in the contest and election that produced the 1st Appellant, and so they lacked the locus standi to challenge the election or emergence of its
leader via election; Counsel said that it was difficult to see how
the exercise of the constitutional right of the members of the
Association (Igbo General Assembly) to select their leader should
affect or injure the Respondents. He relied on the case of
Odeneye Vs Efunnuga (1990) 7 NWLR (Pt.164) 618 at
639 on the issue of locus standi; that a party must establish a
vested right to qualify to take action to protect. He also relied on
Bakare Vs Ajose-Adeogun (Supra).
Counsel referred us to Page 844 of the Records, where
PW2 testified that the Igbo Community Development Association
(ICDA) to which late Dr. Alex Anozie belonged, had been
dissolved and made moribund. Counsel also referred to Page 845
of the Records, where PW2 said: "The Traditional Rulers on that day did ban both 1st Claimant and Oramadike from
further answering the name Eze." He concluded that both
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
MATE
1576734
Page.14
the ICDA of late Dr. Alex Anozie and ICOS led by one Dr. Oramadike, became dead before the Igbo General Assembly (IGA) was formed and conduced the election which produced the 1st Appellant as Onyendu of "Igbo General Assembly" (IGA). Counsel said that the late Dr. Alex Anozie had testified as PW3 to admit that he did not contest the election conducted by the Igbo General Assembly, when he said on Page 900 of the Records:
"The 2nd to 5th Defendants did not ask me to pick a form for the contest, thereafter. Even if they have asked me to pick, I would not have picked one, as the National President of Ohaneze Ndigbo told us to ignore them."
Counsel relied on the case of Sylva Vs INEC (2015) ALL FWLR (Pt.810) 1121 to say that a person who did not participate in an election cannot question the conduct of the said election. He referred us to Page 827 of the Records of Appeal where Late Dr. Alex Anozie deposed:
"I did not contest any election within
Igbo General Assembly."
Counsel said the above contradicted the holding of the trial Judge, when he said, on Pages 1106-1107, thus:
"The case of the Claimants is simply that the 1st Defendants (sic) sometimes in May, 2010 came together under the umbrella of Igbo General Assembly to purportedly elect the 1st
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU
TISATION
H.O.D. LIT
Page 15
Defendant as the Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State, a post which he said he was occupying and that there cannot be two Eze or Onyendu for a community at the same time."
Counsel said contrary to the decision of the trial Court, the late Dr. Alex Anozie never claimed to be Onyendu produced by IGA. Thus, the finding that 1st Appellant was elected to a post late Dr. Alex Anozie was occupying, was lacking in evidential backing.
On claim of no cause of action, Counsel relied on the case of Thomas Vs Olufosoye (1986) 1 NWLR (Pt.18) 669 at 682 for the meaning of the phrase, to say that it is the question as to the civil rights and obligations of the Plaintiffs founding the action to be determined by the Court in favour of one party against the other party.
He also relied on UBN LTD Vs Odusote Bookstores Ltd (1995) 9 NWLR (Pt. 421) 558 at 579.
Counsel said it was surprising, that the Respondents were challenging the Appellants for exercising their constitutional right of their Association and of electing their leaders, without even showing that they (Respondents) are members of the Association or participated in the election! He added that, curiously, the Respondents had pleaded that their Igbo Community Development Association (ICDA), was affiliated to
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W.O. UGWU H.O.D. VITIGATION
Page 16
—
Ohaneze Ndigbo, and they gave evidence to that effect too Pages 843 and 888 of the Records. See also Page 846 of the Records, where PW2 said "We take instructions from the National Body of the Ohaneze Ndigbo, depending on the nature of the instruction", but added:
"I don't know whether Ohaneze Ndigbo at the National level work hand to hand with the Council of Traditional Rulers."
Counsel said the above further confirmed the authority of both Ohaneze Ndigbo and Council of Traditional Rulers, as per Exhibit 33. See also the evidence of late Dr. Alex Anozie on Page 894 of the Records - where he said:
"Ohaneze Ndigbo was in existence before ICDA got affiliated to it in the year, 2010 and we became bonafide members of Ohaneze Ndigbo since then."
Thus, Counsel said the decision of Ohaneze Ndigbo was therefore binding on the Respondents, and that this fact was not lost to the Respondents, as the PW4 had stated, under cross examination:
"I was not in Ibadan on the day of the election of the 1st Defendant. We were given a certificate of affiliation by Ohaneze Ndigbo. As an affiliate of Ohaneze Ndigbo our association have
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
Page 17
no right to pick and choose from the directives that may be handed down to us by the parent body i.e. Ohaneze Ndigbo." See Page 926 of the Records
Counsel noted that Dr. Ilomuanya, who pronounced the dissolution of the warring factions and ban of the ICDA and ICOS led by late Dr. Alex Anozie and Dr. Oramadike, respectively, was the chairman of the South East Council of Traditional Rulers as well as the Chairman of Ohaneze Ndigbo. He referred us to the evidence of DW3, on Pages 952-953 of the Records of Appeal and relied on the case of Musa Vs PRP (1981) 2 NWLR (Pt.) 763 at 769 and Mbanefor Vs Molokwu (Supra) to the effect that:
"The Court would not interfere in a case like this one where members of a voluntary association have come to a decision within the provisions of their constitution, even if the decision is unreasonable... As a voluntary association, it has the to lay down its own decisions even when they are unreasonable. They should be obeyed...
Counsel said it was therefore obvious that the Claimants (Respondents) had disclosed no cause of action before the Lower Court and so the action was incompetent. The added that the Respondents had alleged non compliance with the custom and tradition of Igbo and the Constitution of Ohaneze Ndigbo by
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE/COPY
BARR. WO. UGWU
TIGATION
Page 18
Appellants in the emergence of the 1st Appellant as the Onyendu
Ndigbo, and yet neither the Constitution of Ohaneze Ndigbo was
tendered, nor evidence of the Igbo custom and tradition,
allegedly violated, produced. Counsel relied on the Section
133(1) the Evidence Act, 2011 and the case of Fadlulah Vs
Arewa Textile (1997) 6 NWLR (Pt.518) 546 and UBN Vs
OBE ZUAH (1997) 2 NWLR (Pt.485) 28 to urge us to hold
that Respondents disclosed no cause of action in the case, to
donate power to the trial Court to entertain the Suit.
Counsel added that the Respondents had challenged the selection of the 1st Appellant, but that there was no case of selection of 1st Appellant, as he was elected the Onyendu of
Ndigbo; and that Respondents ended up canvassing a case of
election at the trial. He explained the difference between
selection and election and urged this Court to hold that
Respondent were bound by their pleadings and so cannot jump
from challenge of selection to election. He relied on
Commissioner of Police Benue State and Anor Vs Devcon
Ltd & Anor (1988) 3 NWLR (Pt.83) 407, 420; Ezenwa Vs
Oko (1999) 4 NWLR (Pt.637) 113; Onamade Vs ACB Ltd (1997) I NWLR (Pt.480) 123.
Counsel said that since 1st Appellant did not emerge from a
selection process (but election) the Claim before the lower Court
failed to disclose cause of action and so the claim could not have
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION
CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. O, UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
0.7.60.1.2.4......
Page 19
been proved. He relied on Adeneji & Sons Motors Ltd Vs Immeh (1996) 8 NWLR (Pt.465) 240.
On Issue 2, Counsel said the trial Court was wrong when he, without evaluating the evidence led, made perverse findings, not supported by evidence thereby engendering serious
miscarriage of justice.
Counsel referred us to the findings of the trial Court on Page 1098 of the Records to the effect that the Appellants in their defence and evidence led, made spirited efforts to present the title of Onyendu Ndigbo, being laid claim to by the Claimant as one conferred on him (1st Respondent) by a certain group (ICDA); that evidence abound that the recognition 1st Respondent, as Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State on or before the 14th July, 2009, was not limited to members of ICDA, alone, but also a large number of the Igbo populace in Oyo State and both the South Eastern Council of Traditional Rulers, and Ohaneze Ndigbo; and that whether or not the 1st Respondent was handpicked by a few number of Igbo in Ibadan and Oyo State or was selected by a majority of the entire Igbos in the same locality or that his claim to such post was being contested by another person or group of persons the 1st Respondent was, before the 14th of July, 2009 visit of South East Council of Traditional Rulers, the
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. WO. UGWU
GATION
Page 20
Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State. (See Page 1098 of the Records)
Counsel said the above findings and holding of the Court was a frolic that even contradicted the evidence led by the 1st Respondent, late Dr. Alex Anozie that he was elected by Igbo Community Development Association (ICDA) and the position was confirmed by the Exhibit 6 and that that the election was dissolved by the parent body. Counsel repeated the relevant submissions earlier made under Issue one, and said that the findings of the trial Court was perverse. He relied on the case of Mini Lodge Ltd (supra) when a decision is perverse.
Counsel said that the trial Court did not properly evaluate the evidence before the Court, including the evidence of Appellants and the South East Traditional Rulers Council, which dissolved the ICDA and ICOS, because of the tussle for the Onyendu Ndigbo and their selections of their Onyendu Ndigbo - Exhibit 33.
Counsel also referred us to Page 1099 of the Records and said that the holding of the trial Court therein was not supported by evidence. He relied on the case of Ezeadukwa Vs Maduka (1997) 8 NWLR (Pt.518) 635; Abdullahi Vs Katsina State Housing Authority (2000) FLWLR (Pt.15) 2512, on how to evaluate evidence. He relied on the case of Maja Vs Samouris (2002) 7 NWLR (Pt.765) 78 at 101, to say that the Court does not make declarations of right, either on admission or in CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION
CERTIFIED TRUE CUPY
Page 21
WO. UGWU
ON
default of defence, without hearing evidence and being satisfied
by such evidence. He restated that all the reliefs sought by Respondents trying to fault steps taken by Appellants towards selection of 1st Appellant as Onyendu Ndigbo and his installation as being contrary to Igbo custom and constitution, were misplaced as 1st Appellant was not selected, but elected, by the Igbo General Assembly, and no evidence was led by Respondent on the alleged Igbo custom violated by the election, neither was the Constitution of the Ohaneze Ndigbo, which Respondents asserted, produced. Counsel noted that there was no denial of the fact that both late Dr. Alex Anozie (of ICDA) and Dr. Oramadike (of ICOS), were removed on 14/7/2009 by the resolution of Council of Traditional Rulers of South East, which was accepted by Ohaneze Ndigbo; and the Claimants (Respondents) had admitted the same (See Pages 844 - 845 of Records). But he said the trial Court failed to consider such evidence.
On Issue 3, Counsel said the trial Court violated the constitutional rights of fair hearing of Appellants, when the Court gave judgment against them, on the basis of findings against the Ohaneze Ndigbo and Council of South East Traditional Rulers, who were not parties in the case; Counsel said that the said findings and decisions engendered serious miscarriage of justice, and were unjust, unconstitutional and null and void. Counsel said that decision of the trial Court was prejudicial to the Ohaneze
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE/COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
DATE....
10767 247
Page 22
Ndigbo and the Council of South East Traditional Rulers, who were not parties in the Suit.
Counsel adopted his submissions under the Issues one and two. He noted that the Respondents had sought the coverage and protection of the umbrella organisations - the Ohaneze Ndigbo and South East Council of Traditional Rulers, while trying to fault the selection of the 1st Appellant as Onyendu Ndigbo. (See Reliefs 1 and 3 of the Respondents); but turned round to fight them. He said that no claim was made specifically against the chairman of the South East Council of Traditional Rulers and Ohaneze Ndigbo, and they were not joined as parties and yet it was the South East Council of Traditional Rulers that dissolved the ICDA and ICOS, the platforms of the tussle for election as Onyendu Ndigbo by the 2 parties. He referred us to Pages 1104 - 1105 of the Records, where the trial Court said:
"But one thing that is abundantly clear, both from the pleadings and evidence of all the parties to this action, is that the purported dissolution of ICDA and removal of the 1st Claimant was not carried out by members of the ICDA, but by the chairman of the South East Council of Traditional Rulers." Yet neither that Council nor Dr. Ilomuanya was joined..."
And the trial Court added on Pages 1108 to 1109 of the Records, as follows:
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. WO. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
Page 23
"The Defendants
Defendants have failed
failed to establish the capacity or locus standi of the South East Council of Traditional Rulers to unliterally dissolved (sic) and in a regimental or commando manner removed the 1st Claimant as the Onyendu Ndigbo. The later in time ratification of the actions of the South East Council of Traditional Rulers which the Ohaneze Ndigbo had earlier in Exhibits 12 and 13 refused to recognize will not confer legitimacy on the purported actions of the Traditional Rulers in the absence of evidence showing the capacity and constitutionality of their actions..."
Counsel said that there was no evidence that questioned the capacity or constitutionality of the actions of the South East Council of Traditional Rulers or Ohaneze Ndigbo before the trial Court; that the said finding and holding of the trial Court was introduced, suo motu, and founded on the imagination of the trial Judge.
That trial Judge also said:
"There is no evidence of due process of the law followed by the Council of Traditional Rulers of the South East before the alleged removal and the proscription of his association (i.e. ICDA) was carried out. The later in time ratification of the the
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL
IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BAR.......
8. UGWU
H.O.D, LITIGATION BATE..d
1076/54.
highly
Page 24
despicable manner of removal of the 1st Claimant by the Ohaneze Ndigbo through Exhibits 33 and 34 will not confer any legitimacy on the illegitimate way and manner by which the said removal was carried out." (See Pages 1114-1115 of the Records of Appeal)
Counsel said that contrary to the above, unsupported findings of the trial Court, the Records confirmed due process was followed and referred us to Page 948 of the Records. Counsel also quarreled with the scathing remarks the trial Court made on the Dr. Illomuanya the Chairman of South Est Council of Traditional Rulers, that he used the forum meeting of 14/7/2009 to humiliate late Dr. Alex Anozie, when the trial Judge
said:
"I think it is oppressive for the chairman of the South East Council of Traditional Rulers to ask for the mobilization of all sons and daughters of Igbo extraction which included the Claimants to receive him and his entourage during a visit to Ibadan through Exhibit 19 only to use the same forum to humiliate the Claimants by announcing the dissolution of the association to which they belong and removing the 1st Claimant by mere pronouncement from his exalted position, thereby paving way for the
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL
IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. WO. UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATION
10/1 1.24.
Page 25
emergence of the 1st Defendant as the
Onyendu Ndigbo in the place of the Claimants."
Counsel said no one pleaded or raised question of oppression or humiliation, nor led evidence on the same. He said that the trial Court abandoned the case of the Respondents and formulated a fresh one for them, against non-parties, and on the basis of that findings gave judgment against the Appellants; he said that the approach had massively breached the Constitutional rights of the Appellants, who could not have been expected to defend the non-parties. More so, when the judgment was based on the findings and damaging pronouncements made against non-parties.
Counsel said that, in the circumstance, the trial Court failed to consider and give effect to exhibits 21 to 29, 34 to 35; that aside from giving blanket condemnation to the Exhibit 33, the trial Court gave interpretation not borne out of the Exhibits 21 - 29. Counsel relied on the case of Ogunjemila Vs Ajibade (2010) 11 NWLR (Pt.1206) 559, on effect of violation of right of fair hearing; See also Kokoro Owo Vs Lagos State Govt. (2001) 11 NWLR (Pt.723); Likita Vs COP (2002) 11 NWLR (Pt.777) 145; Intercontractors Vs UAC (1998) 2 NWLR (Pt.76) 303, to say that, a Court can only decide a Case before him on the issues properly raised before it by the parties relating to and concerning the matter in dispute. He said that
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR W. O, UGWU H.O.D. LITIGATIO
Page 26
matters concerning third parties who are not parties before, it cannot be validly raised and determined.
Counsel said it was a violation of the fundamental rights of Appellants to fair hearing to found the judgment against them on the findings made against the South East Council of Traditional Rulers. He relied on the case of Ndakwo Vs Ejika (2002) 13 NWLR (Pt.783) 156; CK & WMC Ltd Vs Akingbade (2016) 14 NWLR (Pt.1533) 487 and other Cases. He urged us to resolve the Issues for Appellants and to allow the Appeal.
Responding, Counsel for Respondents, Ibrahim A. Kareem-Ojo Esq, (who settled the brief), on Issue 1, said the trial Court was right to entertain the Suit and grant the reliefs sought by the Respondents, as per the evidence adduced. He said that the Appellants' submission on improper constitution of the action, was misconceived and misleading. Counsel said they (Respondents) were right to take out the suit against the Appellants, who attempted to breach the Igbo custom and tradition; he said that the Ohaneze Ndigbo and the South East Council of Traditional Rulers were aware of the case as the 2 bodies had testified, through their representatives in the Suit; he said that PW1 was the Secretary General of Ohaneze Ndigbo, who testified on a subpoena and cited his evidence as per his cross examination on Pages 837-838 of the Records.
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEA IBADAN DIVISION
CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. WO. UGWU H.O.D, LITIGATION
Page 27
Counsel also referred us to the evidence of DW2 - who was the Administrative Secretary of South East Council of Traditional Rulers, who said:
"I am the Chairman of the South East Council of Traditional Rulers, Eze Dr. C.L. Illomuanya (CON), who gave me (sic) a letter to be in Court today"- (Page 945 of the Records)
Counsel said all that showed that both the South East Council of Traditional Rulers and Ohaneze Ndigbo, were aware of the Suit and decided to standby; that they all gave evidence before the Court and were therefore bound by the decision of the Court. He relied on A.G. Federation Vs A.G. Abia State & Ors (No.2) (2002) 6 NWLR (Pt.542) 663; Green Vs Green (1987) 3 NWLR (Pt.61) 480 to say that Appellants cannot be heard to complain of non-joinder. He added that non-joinder of a party interested in a Suit does not defeat the action, and he relied on FGN Vs Interstella Comms. Ltd (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1463) 1 at 31; Iyere Vs B.F.F. M. Ltd (2008) 18 NWLR (Pt.1119) 300.
On Issue of Locus Standi, Counsel said the Respondents had no claims or reliefs against the 2 bodies, as the 2nd - 6th
Appellants were the people who organized and made the 1st Appellant an Onyendu Ndigbo. Thus, the Suit was properly constituted; he said that the contention of Appellants on the
Issue of locus standi was therefore misconstrued, in view of the
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU
H.O.D.
LITIGATION LITI.....
Page 28
pleadings, evidence and the reliefs sought. He referred us to the
pleadings of Respondents on Pages 4
-
6 of the Records of
Appeal, particularly Paragraphs 23 and 24 of their pleading, which stated:
(23) "The Claimants aver that there can only be one Eze Ndigbo or Onyendu Ndigbo for a Community and unless the occupier of the office dies or he is impeached or resigned there cannot be any other Eze or Onyendu for that community. The Claimants plead that the 1st Claimant is still alive and has neither been impeached nor resigned.
(24) The Claimants aver that the Ohaneze Ndigbo and the South East Traditional Council have before May, 2010 and thereafter acknowledged the
the 1st Claimant as the recognized Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo State."
Counsel added that it was therefore clear from the pleadings upon which evidence was led, that what was challenged by the Respondents was the attempt to remove and replace the 1st Respondent by the Defendants/Appellants as the Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan land with the 1st Appellant. Thus, the issue of who was the authentic Onyendu Ndigbo was the matter which was before the trial Court and both the late Dr. Alex Anozie, the erstwhile 1st Respondent, who was in that office had the locus standi to challenge anybody or group of persons that
CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEAL IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE/COPY
BARR. W. O. UGWU H.O.D., LITIGATION
DATE
Page 29
attempted to take over his (1st Respondent's) role, office and or
title.
Counsel asserted that the Respondents had the locus standi to challenge the 1st Appellant and he referred us to Exhibits 1, 2 and 3, which were letters of 23/6/2010, 10/8/2010 and 10/5/2015 respectively: Exhibit 1 had advised that "all official dealings with Ndigbo in Oyo State be done through the Oyo State Branch of Ohaneze Ndigbo" and listed the principal officers thereof.
Counsel said Exhibits 1, 2 and 3 came after the purported directions of the South East Traditional Rulers and selection of the 1st Appellant as Onyendu Ndigbo by the 2nd - 6th Appellants in May, 2010; that it was the attempt to install the 1st Appellant that led to the action - the Suit. He relied on Odeneye Vs Efunnuga (1990) 7 NWLR (Pt.164) 618 on the issue of
locus standi.
On disclosure of reasonable cause of action, Counsel relied on the case of Thomas Vs Olufosoye (1961) 1 NWLR (Pt.18) 669 for the definition of cause of action, as the aggregate of what will confer right to a party to sue. He said that the reliefs 1, 2 and 3 put together provide the right to the Respondents to seek redress. He relied on UBN Vs Odusote (1995) 9 NWLR (Pt.421) 558 to the effect that the entire set of facts that give rise to an enforceable right/claim constitute cause of action; that the claim of the Respondents and the CA/IB/116/2014
COURT OF APPEA IBADAN DIVISION CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
Olmb
BARRW, O. UGWU H.O.D.
-
Worthy People
- By solomon2day
- On 03/08/2024
- In Special Report
Lord our God help us. We pray to do good to the poor and the stranger, that we may be worthy of being called your people.Hosea 7:8-16
8Ephraim, he hath mixed himself among the people; Ephraim is a cake not turned.
11Ephraim also is like a silly dove without heart: they call to Egypt, they go to Assyria.
15Though I have bound and strengthened their arms, yet do they imagine mischief against me.
-
Before it is too late
- By solomon2day
- On 02/08/2024
- In Update with Solomon
The use of alcohol, illicit substances and hard drugs by students and youths has reached an all-time high in different parts of Nigeria. It has in fact become a social problem and menace.
Indeed, in states where Those-in-Charge generate revenue from illegal structures, illicit substances and alcohol are sold in makeshift kiosks along the road, under bridges and motor parks.
The insinuation is that the cream in society may be benefiting from the sales.
That is why it goes unabated.
These hard drugs have negatively affected the behavior and appearance of students and youths.
Of worry are the grievous and heinous crimes that are committed on a daily basis under the influence of alcohol and hard drugs.
It is high time the government at all levels take decisive steps to salvage those affected before it is too late because it has started having adverse effects on the socio-economic fortunes of the giant of Africa.
-
Mind your Utterances-Onyendu to Igbo Splinter group in Oyo
- By solomon2day
- On 31/07/2024
- In News
The Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo state High Chief Alloy Obi has cautioned a splinter Igbo group led by one Chief Emmanuel Nezakor to desist from making inflammatory statements that could breach the peace among Igbos in Oyo state.
Chief Obi gave this warning on Wednesday in a chat with The New Federation.
''They are free to express their opinions, but they should mind their utterances. If they are dissatisfied by the judgment of the Appeal court, they know what to do, they should consult with their lawyer. They should not attempt to breach the prevailing peace in the Igbo community in Oyo state. I am not forcing them to support me. I have tried my best as a man. They should not provoke us. How can Chief Emmanuel Nzeakor say he is representing their legal team? When he is not a lawyer, in fact, it is a shame for they claim that they were not aware of the judgment date. It is in their best interest to stop making noise. However, I am happy that in their press conference, they disclosed that I sent my people to them to embrace peace./ Once again, I am advising them to embrace peace, ''Chief Obi stated. -
Hunger Protests-Watch out for Criminals-Onyendu to Security Agencies.
- By solomon2day
- On 31/07/2024
- In News
The Onyendu Ndigbo of Ibadan and Oyo state High Chief Alloy Obi has warned against the hijack of the impending nationwide protests against hunger and bad governance by criminals.Chief Obi gave this warning on Wednesday in a chat with The New Federation.
''We are in a democracy, Nigerians are free to protest. However, the security agencies should not allow criminals to hijack protests against hunger, poverty and bad governance. It is high time government at all levels cut down th costs of governance. Millions of Nigerians are finding it difficult to feed themselves, even once a day. All those in public office should sit down and find solutions to the multiple problems confronting th country. When the center is weak and all regions manage their resources, then we will get it right,'' High Chief Obi stated.
-
Wishes and Expectations
- By solomon2day
- On 27/07/2024
- In Update with Solomon
The key elements of tyranny include, but are not limited to, insensitivity, brutality, random arrests, incarceration and unresolved cases of killings.Curiously, the prohibitive price of the Premium Motor Spirit(PMS) is already having multiple negative effects on the economy, even as Nigerians persist in their daily lamentations of the unbearable hardships that have been their lot in recent times.
Indeed, governance on the platform of deformed democratic institutions attracts tyranny, which is not in tandem with the wishes and expectations of Nigerians.
Interestingly, the people are yet to identify any conceivable reason for the policy direction of Those-in-Charge towards the worrisome and disturbing situation that called for urgent deliverance.
The cost of living is on the rise on a daily basis and Those-in-Charge continue to appeal and cajole citizens to take their sufferings as sacrifices that must be made for the anti-people policies that are ravaging the land.
Self Preservation in the Midst of Evil
These are very dangerous times in so many states in Nigeria, which have, long before now, become the Biblical Sodom and Gomorrah.
Indeed, the overlords in the states have succeeded in remodeling their domains into havens of all that defies morality and decency.
Of worry is the increase in the cases of death revolving around drink and food poisoning, in addition to sexually transmitted diseases. All the afore mentioned are weapons of destruction by those obsessed with temporal power.
Curiously, the services of migrants from other states are engaged to carry out the unthinkable and unbelievable. The only option now open to Nigerians is to adopt measures that would ensure self-preservation in the midst of evil by Those-in-Charge.
-
Worship God with Hymns
- By solomon2day
- On 27/07/2024
- In Special Report
Worship God through hymns of praises.You express your faith in God and His son through hymns.
By singing the hymns, you bring out the thanksgiving of your heart to God for His abundant blessings on you.
Hymns are reflections of your redemption and victory through Christ.
Take not to avoid :
1)Using hymns to insult people. Singing to abuse and degrade others is common place in society, most especially when there is rancor or conflict.
2)Using hymns to express non-existent feelings of the heart.
3)Using hymns hypocritically.
Hymns must reflect the sincerity of your heart as a Christian, to God. Through these hymns you can be blessed abundantly by God.
Learn to use the hymns as a means of comfort and hope in times of despair and as an assurance of salvation in Christ.
Always sing of love, peace, joy and hope, as you strive to avoid depriving yourself of what is beneficial to all.
John 4 : 23-24
23 : But the hour cometh and now is when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth, for the Father seeketh such to worship Him.
24 : God is a spirit and all who worship Him, must worship him in spirit and in truth.
-
The Housing Problem
- By solomon2day
- On 25/07/2024
- In Update with Solomon
Nigerian workers are increasingly giving up hopes of owning their own homes, as issues of poor salaries, unfavorable working environment and conditions linger.Most workers have for long contended with the exploitative tendencies of house owners, who increase rents randomly.
This is in addition to the soaring cost of land and building materials.
Indeed, the workers have taken their destinies into their own hands when it comes to the fundamental issue of housing.
The beauty of working is to retire into one's own home, with the assistance of the government.
The provision of housing loans to be paid back installmentally is desirable, but this is not the case.
Interestingly, the National Housing Fund(NHF) seems to be a method the government introduced to evade its responsibilities.
The housing fund without doubt is an imposition by the Federal Government of Nigeria, in a bid to run away from its responsibilities to provide either affordable housing schemes for Nigerian workers or giving out housing loans to the workers.
The NHF is used to scooping cash from already impoverished workers because the deductions are mandatory and almost non-refundable until probably after retirement.
The interest on the deductions collected from the workers is equally ridiculous.
More painful is the fact that the process of obtaining housing loans is very cumbersome and workers are usually frustrated, making them resign to fate and allow the deductions to continue without attempting to take the loans.
Workers feel cheated and, due to the fact that they have no options, and are not transparently represented by their industrial unions, have resigned to fate.
Sadly, the NHF has never given an account of the contributions and balance of workers on a monthly basis for a long time.
-
Growing in the Word of God
- By solomon2day
- On 25/07/2024
- In Special Report
Let us grow in the grace and knowledge of the word of God.Titus 2: 11-14
11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men.
12 Teaching us that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously and Godly in this present world.
13 Looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.
14 Who gave Himself for us that He might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
-
The Precarious Situation
- By solomon2day
- On 22/07/2024
- In Update with Solomon
Lawlessness is now the way of life in Nigeria, due to the lingering poverty and hunger in the land.A review of the economy and security architecture will unravel the untold story, only if a transparent probe is conducted in the days to come.
A number of the crises in the last eight years have generated revenue for a few pockets, with millions of Nigerians always contending with the sufferings and hardships during such crises.
Indeed, the interests of Nigerians have been undermined or destabilized based on ethnic, religious and gender considerations.
Sadly, the political leaders in the states, have failed to convincingly ensure a conducive environment, but are in the nick of time, seeking direct investment.
Investors can only develop confidence in the economy when there is regular electricity supply, free flow of potable water, good and motorable roads, security of lives and property, skilled and trained power and favorable incentives for startups. -
Hearts hot as oven
- By solomon2day
- On 20/07/2024
- In Special Report
Let us pray ceaselessly for those involved in a quiet conspiracy in the offices of dictatorships and the Ministers of state who scheme and cheat with their plotting hearts hot as oven.
Hosea 7:1-7
3They make the king glad with their wickedness, and the princes with their lies.
Donate