Emirship Tussle: Court Restrains Ado-Bayero, 4 Others From Acting As Emirs
A Kano State High Court, on Monday, granted a perpetual injunction restraining the 15th Emir of Kano, Alhaji Aminu Ado-Bayero, and four other dethroned emirs of Bichi, Rano, Gaya and Karaye from parading themselves as emirs.
The applicants are the Attorney General of Kano State, the Speaker Kano State House of Assembly and the Kano State House of Assembly, who through their counsel Ibrahim Isah-Wangida Esq, filed a motion exparte dated May 27.
The applicants sought a court order restraining Ado-Bayero, and Four other dethroned emirs of Bichi, Rano, Gaya and Karaye from parading themselves as emir
The respondents are: Ado-Bayero, Alhaji Nasiru Ado-Bayero Bichi emir, Dr Ibrahim Abubakar ll, emir of Karaye, Alhaji Kabiru Muhammad-Inuwa, emir of Rano and Alhaji Aliyu Ibrahim-Gaya, emir of Gaya.
Others are the Inspector General of Police, Director of State Security Service, Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps and Nigeria Army.
Delivering the judgment, Justice Amina Adamu-Aliyu, held that the Kano State House of Assembly had powers to amend and propose a bill for the peace and good governance of a state under section 4 rule 6,7(b) of the 1999 Constitution as amended.
“The Kano State Governor has the right to ascent the proposed bill to law after being passed by the state assembly”
The court also restrained the Police and other security agencies from violating, disobeying or tempering the Kano State Emirate (Repeal) Law 2024.
“The deposed Emirs shall surrender all movable and immovable properties in their possession that belong to the Kano State Emirate Council to the state government” Adamu-Aliyu said
She held that the first respondent legal counsel withdrawal without notice to other parties is unprofessional and that moving their motion is as good as not filing it since it has been abandoned.
The judge said the act of the 6th to 9 respondents for smuggling the first respondent to Kano after the enactment of the Emirate Repeal Law 2024 disregards what they have sworn for the protection of life and property.
Earlier, counsel to the applicant, Mr Ibrahim Isa-Wangida, urged the court to discount the respondent’s affidavit of facts under order 39 rules 1 and 2 of the Court.