CaseLaw
Osakwe V. Gov. Imo State (1991) CLR 7(f) (CA)
Brief
Facts
On March 23, 1981 Ebeoha 1 Eze M.A.B. Igwe of Ebenator Autonomous Community in Orlu Local Government Area of Imo consisting of three villages, viz. Amaebu, Amannachi and Amazu in order of seniority died. With his demise it naturally became necessary to present a candidate. For the appellant, a native of Amannachi, is as much as he had vied for the coveted stool with Eze M.A.B Igwe in 1978 and had even appeared before the Ikewechi panel of Inquiry of that year in opposition to Eze M.A.B. Igwe’s claim to Ebeoha I but had finally to withdraw his candidate when assured that Amannachi was next to Amaebu in the line of succession with Amazu coming last in that order of seniority, for the rotatory system evolved for the community, this was his time. He thus signified his interest in the stool by collecting a questionnaire to that effect which he allegedly failed to fill and return to the Government of Imo State as stipulated in Community’s Constitution (Exh. ‘J’) the validity of which he challenged in the trial court in the case now on appeal.
It was the Appellant’s case that as an aspirant to the vacant stool of the Ebeoha of Ebenator, he was cognisant of the fact that it was the executive turn of his people of Amannachi to produce an Eze for the Community; that he had already been identified and selected by the said people of Amannachi, that Exhibit “J” was not the Community constitution of Ebenator and that M. C Ogunjiofor who dabbled in to the selection process was not the regent of Ebenator whose custom in fact admits of no such office.
The case of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Respondents is that the Appellant was not a contestant to the stool of Ebeoha II of Ebenator; that while they conceded that in accordance with the tradition and Constitution of Ebenator Autonomous Community, the Eze-elect should be selected from Amannachi Village, his identification, selection and installation must be the responsibility of the entire Ebenator Community, which Community in the instant case, presented 4th Respondent to the 3rd Respondent; that a letter by the then Acting Commissioner for Local Government that the selection of Ebeoha II be limited to Amannachi Village, being found to be erroneous was reversed by the substantive Commissioner for Local Government when he resumed duty and that in the first stage of the selection process in which Appellant participated but failed to return the questionnaire the 4th Respondent had his memorandum of presentation sent to 1st Respondent leading to his (4th Respondent’s) recognition in accordance with Exhibit ‘J’ on 21st February, 1986 and anchored on the provisions of the Traditional Rulers and Autonomous Communities Law, Law No 11 of 1981.
The 4th Respondent whose case is founded on Exhibit ‘J’ and the collective will and act of the entire Ebenator Community, asserted that he was duly recognised by the Government as the Eze of Ebenator Autonomous Community on February 21, 1986 after complying with all the steps necessary both under Exhibit ‘J’ and under the Traditional Rulers and Autonomous Communities Law, Law No. 11 of 1981 (hereinafter in the of this judgement referred to as Law No. 11 of (1981). It was this act of recognition by the Government therefore that gave rise to the suit herein.
At the close of pleadings, issues were joined, trial commenced and at the conclusion of the case the learned trial Judge dismissed the appellant’s claims in its entirety.
Dissatisfied with the judgement, he appealed.
Issues
Whether the trial court was wrong in holding that the procedure for the...