Chidi Odinkalu, a prominent Nigerian lawyer and former Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, has expressed skepticism about the recent Federal High Court ruling in Kano State regarding the Emirate Council Law 2024.
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/afam.jpg")
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Idrinstitute.jpg")
In a series of tweets, Odinkalu questioned the timing and jurisdiction of the court’s decision. He pointed out that the judge claimed to have made an order on May 23, 2024, via virtual proceedings concerning a law that was assented to at 5:10 pm on the same day. Odinkalu asked, “The judge has to explain at what time the suit was filed because no court registry is open at that hour.”
The judge in Kano here claims he made an order on 23 May, 2024 via virtual proceedings in a suit concerning a law that was assented to at 17:10 hrs (5:10 pm) on the same day. The judge has to explain at what time the suit was filed because no court registry is open at that hour. pic.twitter.com/GFvWaORYrx
— Chidi Odinkalu, CGoF (@ChidiOdinkalu) June 21, 2024
Furthermore, Odinkalu highlighted inconsistencies in the court’s judgement, stating that the court deemed paragraphs 3, 4, and 6 of the enrolled orders as “not relevant to this application.”
However, these paragraphs were where the judge recognized jurisdictional issues with exercising powers in relation to a Chieftaincy dispute. Odinkalu questioned how these paragraphs could be considered irrelevant.
The Kano Emirate Council Law 2024, which was passed by the state House of Assembly and signed into law by the governor, has been a subject of controversy. While the court stated that the law remained valid, it nullified all steps taken by the state government after the court’s earlier interim order, which had effectively halted the implementation of the law pending the determination of a petition filed against the state government.
While making the ruling, Justice Liman said, “I have listened to the audio of the governor both in Hausa and English after assenting to the law, and I am convinced that the respondents are aware of the order of maintaining status quo pending the hearing and determination of the motions on notice in the court.”
“Having been satisfied that the respondents are aware of the court order, the court in exercise of its powers set aside an action because it is in violation of the court’s order. I think it is a very serious matter for anyone to flout the orders of the court and go scot free with it,” Liman said.
The judge based his ruling on the grounds that the government was aware of the court order to maintain the status quo but went ahead to take further steps and actions.
“I am convinced that the respondents are aware of the order dated May 23 to maintain the status quo pending the hearing and determination of the case.
Get Your Copy Today! "Drafts and Precedents on Civil Litigation" is available at the following recommended booksellers: 07051822705, lindabasil@yahoo.com
