By Musa Danladi Esq.
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/NBBSPIDEL.png")
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/2026-Summer-IDRI-Masterclass.jpg")
Introduction:
The legal landscape is often rife with challenges, particularly concerning the proliferation of ex-parte orders and issues of coordinate jurisdiction. In recent times, such challenges have become pronounced, highlighted by the Kano Emirate Tussle. This write up delves into the role of legal practitioners in mitigating these challenges, with a focus on the need for the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) to discipline erring lawyers.
Understanding Ex-parte Orders and Coordinate Jurisdiction:
Ex-parte orders are legal orders granted at the request of one party without requiring the presence of the other party. While they serve legitimate purposes such as urgent injunctions, they are susceptible to abuse, leading to injustice and unfair outcomes. Coordinate jurisdiction refers to situations where multiple courts have jurisdiction over the same matter, often resulting in conflicting decisions and confusion.
Challenges Posed by Ex-parte Orders and Coordinate Jurisdiction:
The unchecked proliferation of ex-parte orders can undermine the principles of fairness, equality, and due process. It creates a scenario where one party can obtain an order without the other party’s knowledge or opportunity to present their case, leading to biased outcomes. Similarly, conflicting decisions due to coordinate jurisdiction can erode public trust in the judiciary and prolong legal disputes, causing undue hardship to litigants. Of much concern is the conduct of some legal practitioners in bringing two courts of coordinate jurisdiction to Collusion or conflict.
Case Study: Kano Emirate Tussle:
The Kano Emirate Turmoil serves as a pertinent case study illustrating the challenges posed by ex-parte orders by two different Courts of coordinate jurisdiction. In on Thursday the 23rd day of May, 2024, the Kano State House of Assembly passed a bill abrogating the four additional emirates created by the then Government Dr. Umar Abdullahi Ganduje in 2019, which in there opinion and opinion of many had effectively reduced the status and influence of the historic Kano Emirate. This led to a legal battle, with different courts issuing conflicting orders regarding the status of the emirates and the jurisdictional authority of the Kano State Government.
Following the recent passage of a new law, Alhaji Aminu Babba Dan-agundi filed a lawsuit in the Federal High Court, naming the Kano State Government, the Commissioner of Police, the Director of the DSS, and the Inspector General of Police as defendants. He asserts that the implementation of this law would infringe upon his fundamental rights as a traditional title holder. In response, the Federal High Court issued an interim order restraining the Commissioner of Police and the Inspector General of Police, among others, from enforcing or implementing the new law until the case is resolved. The matter has been adjourned until June 3, 2024. The police have indicated their intention to comply with this order.
However, it is concerning that while the case is still pending before the Federal High Court, the Kano State Government has initiated a separate legal proceeding in the State High Court. They have obtained a counter-order instructing the police to enforce the very law that the Federal High Court had previously restrained them from enforcing.
In my professional opinion, which aligns with the legal framework, a Motion Experte serves as a respectful request to the Court to issue an order preserving the current status quo and preventing any changes to the existing circumstances.
In this particular case, it is unclear why the Court would issue an order compelling the police to evict Aminu Beyero from the Palace, even if the State High Court which issued the order dated 27th of May, 2024 is not aware of the pendency of the Order dated 23rd of May, 2024. It is prudent for the Court to weigh the possibility of fracas and/or commotion which may occur as a result of the consequence of an order issued.
I believe it is the responsibility of the Legal Practitioner praying for such an order to disclose all material facts and evidence to the Court in their affidavit, so as to assist the Court in arriving at a just conclusion of the dispute.
It is possible that some individuals may argue that the Order issued on May 23, 2024 by the Federal High Court was erroneous due to the court’s lack of jurisdiction in chieftaincy matters. While this argument may hold some validity, it is not my intention to analyze the substantive matter before any of the courts, as doing so would be considered unethical. My primary concern lies in the conduct of a lawyer who seeks to obtain a counter order when another order to the contrary already exists. In my professional opinion, this action amounts to placing two courts of coordinate jurisdiction in a state of conflict.
The fundamental question that arises is whether a court order can be disregarded simply because one party believes the court lacks jurisdiction. Furthermore, it seems illogical to request another court to compel the police to enforce an action that has been prohibited by a different court. By doing so, aren’t we essentially subordinating the authority of the court to the discretion of the police, allowing them to choose which orders to obey and which to disregard?
All arguments regarding the propriety or otherwise of issuing the initial order should be included in the State Government’s response to the case before the Court on June 3, 2024, which is the return date for parties to address the Court on the question of Jurisdiction raised by the Federal High Court Judge.
Any suggestion that parties can now determine the outcome of a case from the comfort of their homes or offices by refusing to obey the order is incorrect and ill-advised.
I prefer not to engage in any discussion on the substance of the case to avoid pre-empting the outcome of the Court’s decisions. I will limit my analysis to the points of compliance or non-compliance with the order issued by the Federal High Court and the subsequent actions of some Legal Practitioners in securing a counter order in the face of the already existing one.
To ensure impartiality and adherence to legal processes, it is crucial that all parties respect the Court’s decisions and orders issued on May 23, 2024. The current Government’s legitimacy was established through a Supreme Court Judgment, making them direct beneficiaries of the Court’s authority.
It is advisable for the Legal Practitioners in charge to counsel the Government to allow the Federal High Court to determine its jurisdiction before approaching another Court, considering the grounds of lack of jurisdiction by the Federal High Court.
In my professional opinion, which aligns with the legal framework, a Motion Experte serves as a respectful request to the Court to issue an order preserving the current status quo and preventing any changes to the existing circumstances.
In this particular case, it is unclear why the Court would issue an order compelling the police to evict Aminu Beyero from the Palace, even if the State High Court which issued the order dated 27th of May, 2024 is not aware of the pendency of the Order dated 23rd of May, 2024. It is prudent for the Court to weigh the possibility of fracas and/or commotion which may occur as a result of the consequence of an order issued.
I believe it is the responsibility of the Legal Practitioner praying for such an order to disclose all material facts and evidence to the Court in their affidavit, so as to assist the Court in arriving at a just conclusion of the dispute.
In reference to the court order, it is imperative that all parties involved adhere to the directives issued by the judge, irrespective of any perceived proprietary concerns. Compliance with the order should be prioritized, followed by the appropriate filing of any necessary documentation. It is not within the purview of the State Government to make determinations regarding the proprietary nature of the order.
Role of Legal Practitioners in Mitigating Challenges:
Legal practitioners play a crucial role in mitigating the proliferation of ex-parte orders and coordinate jurisdiction. They have a duty to uphold the principles of justice, fairness, and ethical conduct in their practice. This includes conducting due diligence before seeking ex-parte orders, ensuring full disclosure to the court, and refraining from forum shopping to exploit coordinate jurisdiction issues.
The Need for NBA to Discipline Erring Lawyers:
The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) serves as the regulatory body for legal practitioners in Nigeria. It has a responsibility to enforce ethical standards and discipline erring lawyers who engage in misconduct, including the abuse of ex-parte orders and coordinate jurisdiction. Disciplinary measures may include sanctions, fines, suspension, or disbarment, depending on the severity of the misconduct.
Conclusion:
Mitigating the proliferation of ex-parte orders and coordinate jurisdiction requires collective efforts from legal practitioners, regulatory bodies, and the judiciary. By upholding ethical standards, promoting transparency, and enforcing disciplinary actions against erring lawyers, the legal profession can restore public trust and ensure the fair and efficient administration of justice. The case study of the Kano Emirate Turmoil underscores the urgency of addressing these challenges and highlights the vital role of the Nigerian Bar Association in maintaining the integrity of the legal profession.
Musa Danladi Esq. Tri-NASR Solicitors +234 7038620398, Musadanladi@Trinasr.com
[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
Available now for NGN 40,000 at ASC Publications, 10, Boyle Street, Onikan, Lagos. Beside High Court, TBS. Email publications@ayindesanni.com or WhatsApp +2347056667384. Purchase Link: https://paystack.com/buy/evidence-act-complete-annotation
______________________________________________________________________ “Enhance Legal Practice With Authoritative Reports” — Alexander Payne Offers Comprehensive Law Reports, Spanning Over A Century Of Nigerian Jurisprudence
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
The book also examines Nigeria's legal ecosystem, focusing on the LPELR and NBA AI Guidelines. As a bonus, every purchase comes with a FREE eBook titled: How to Use the AI Features in LegalPedia and LawPavilion.
Ohio Books Ltd praises the publication, stating:
"....this is the only Nigerian book I know of on the topic."
How to Order:
📞 Call, Text, or WhatsApp: 08034917063 | 07055285878
📧 Email: benadigwe1@gmail.com
🌎 Website: www.benadigwe.com
Ebook Version: Access it directly online at https://selar.com/prv626
Authored by Ben Ijeoma Adigwe Esq., ACIarb (UK), LL.M, Dip. in Artificial Intelligence, Director at the Delta State Ministry of Justice, Asaba, Nigeria.
______________________________________________________________________
