Following the Appeal Court ruling on the lingering Kano Emirate Tussle on stay of execution of it’s January 10 decision that affirmed the powers of Kano state Government in reappointing Muhammadu Sanusi as Emir of Kano, the Kano State Government says, Sanusi’s Reinstatement remains Valid.
The Kano State Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice Barrister Haruna Dederi revealed this while briefing Journalists in Kano.
The Court of Appeal in Abuja had on Friday restrained the enforcement of its January 10 judgment, which upheld the Kano State Government’s repeal of the 2019 Emirate Council Law, pending the determination of an appeal filed by one of the kingmakers Alh. Aminu Baba DanAgundi, loyal to the 15th Emir of Kano, Alh. Aminu Ado Bayero at the Supreme Court.
The appellate court’s January 10 judgment had overturned an earlier ruling by the Federal High Court in Kano, which nullified the Kano State Emirate Council (Repeal) Law 2024.
The law reversed the creation of five new emirates and reinstated Sanusi Lamido Sanusi as Emir of Kano.
The Court of Appeal, in setting aside the Federal High Court’s decision, ruled that the lower court lacked jurisdiction over chieftaincy matters, which fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of state high courts.
In a reaction, the Kano State Attorney General Barrister Haruna Dederi, the ruling of the Appellate court on Friday does not invalidated the reinstatement of Muhammadu Sanusi II as the 16th Emir.
He noted that, the matter is functus officio, meaning, the decision taken by the court on January 10 was final and binding, adding that, only the Supreme Court has the power to set aside the decision of the Appeal Court.
The Attorney General said, “it doesn’t mean that the judgment delivered on January 10, 2025, has been quashed. That judgment is still standing, still in place, and subsisting.
The Court of Appeal cannot reverse its own decision. It is not possible. Only the Supreme Court has the power to set aside the judgment given by a lower court.
Dederi called on the people in destructive misrepresentation to the ruling to desist from interfering in judicial processes adding that, “the judiciary ass a sacred institution must be jealously respected and guarded for the preservation of peace and orderliness of society.”
The Kano Attorney General also, called on the people of the state to resist provocative attempts and continue with respecting the constituted authorities.
Recalled that, on January 10, 2025, a three-member panel of the Court of Appeal, in Abuja led by Justice Mohammad Mustapha, set aside the judgment of Justice A. Liman of the Federal High Court, Kano, which nullified the steps and actions taken by the Kano State Government pursuant to the Kano State Emirate Council (Repeal) Law 2024, including the appointment of Sanusi Lamido Sanusi as the 16th Emir of Kano.
The Appellate Court also dismissed the decision of the Federal High Court judge to hear the matter relating to the emirate council, ruling that the Federal High Court lacked the jurisdiction to do so. This decision upheld the removal of Bayero as the 15th Emir.
Dissatisfied with the verdict of Justice Mustapha’s panel, DanAgundi proceeded to the Supreme Court to seek the overturning of the lower court’s verdict. He also filed a motion for a stay of execution of Justice Mustapha’s judgment pending the hearing and determination of the Supreme Court’s ruling on the matter.
The application was also moved on the grounds that the applicant initially instituted the suit in Kano to protect his fundamental rights and argued that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to hear and determine the suit.
In a unanimous ruling, the three-member panel of Justices led by Justice Abang on Friday held that the application was meritorious and deserving of the court’s discretion in the interest of justice.
“The law is settled. The court is enjoined to exercise its discretion judiciously and in the interest of justice,” Justice Abang said
Justice Abang held that, the mandatory injunction ordered that the status quo ante bellum be maintained by the sheriff of this court and the trial court as it was before the trial court’s decision on 13/6/2024 in Suit No. FHC/KN/CS/182/2024.
In granting the injunction, Justice Abang emphasised that the applicant’s process was competent and had met all the necessary legal conditions required to obtain the relief sought.
He noted that a valid appeal was already pending before the Supreme Court, reinforcing the need to preserve the subject matter of the litigation.
Comments are closed.