On Kano emirates judgement
I have watched with amusement how even my legal colleagues view the issue at hand from a very wrong angle. Some people are talking of ‘obeying’ the court order; others are talking of ‘stay of execution’; while others still talk of ‘appeal’. On the other hand, many are condemning the statement issued by the Kano […]
I have watched with amusement how even my legal colleagues view the issue at hand from a very wrong angle. Some people are talking of ‘obeying’ the court order; others are talking of ‘stay of execution’; while others still talk of ‘appeal’. On the other hand, many are condemning the statement issued by the Kano State Commissioner for Information, and calling the statement all sorts of names, including being disrespectful to the court, or the Rule of Law.
From the onset, I want to say that the statement is nothing of sort. People should read it again, and very carefully too. It is nothing other than a political statement issued to save face. Nowhere in the statement has the Kano State Government said that it is not a binding verdict. It simply said that it will study it carefully to grasp its import and impact before deciding on the next course of action. It might not have said so in such exact words, but that is precisely what it has said in a journalistic language. Do not forget that the Commissioner is a seasoned journalist, and his principal (H.E.), that is the least he should be expected to do. So forgive him and read what he has said again, and very carefully too. Let me now turn to my main reason for this my intervention.
Many people (and sadly including my fellow lawyers) talk about ‘execution of the judgement”, ‘stay of execution’ and what have you in relation to the judgement. They completely ignore the fact that it is what is referred to as a DECLARATORY JUDGEMENT in law. And a declaratory judgement is simply a declaratory judgement; it is a judgment which determines the rights of parties without ordering anything to be done or awarding damages. There is, therefore, nothing to ‘execute’ in a declaratory judgement and ipso facto, it is not a judgement capable of being ‘STAYED’. In other words, as a declaratory judgment it cannot be enforced or executed, so a stay cannot be granted. It is only a judgement that is capable of execution or enforcement that can be stayed, to ensure that none of the contending parties is placed in a position of irreversible disadvantage in the long run, if any action is taken, or not taken for that matter.
In the case under reference, the court was simply asked to declare if the action of the Kano State Government was in accordance with the law, and after reviewing the facts presented to it, and after giving the other side to state its own case, the court found that the action was not in accordance with the law, and it so decided.
All sensational reports that the court has ‘sacked’ this or that were purely journalistic jargons. All the court said was that the action of the Kano State Government was wrong in law, and so it is as good as if it has never happened. That was a declaration. The court has not, will not, and will never say go and chase these emirs from their palaces. That is left to the good nature of the party in the wrong to respect that it had not acted in accordance with the law and accordingly retrace its steps.
The way things stand now, it is as good as saying that the new emirates never existed. The only option open to the KNSG now is to appeal the judgement within the stipulated time. I want to draw attention to a mistake people are making. An appeal is not a retrial of a case. It is simply, a review to see that judgment is in full accord with the extant laws. The facts of the case are already settled by the court below, and any new facts that had not been presented are not allowed to be presented during the appeal. So an appellate court can only allow or dismiss an appeal, or in certain exceptional circumstances where the appellate court realises that there are new issues/facts which, if these had been considered during the trial, the outcome would have been different, then it can order for a retrial by the lower court.
All things considered, it is now left for the Kano State Government to realise that its earlier action in creating the new emirates was not in accordance with the law. The implication of not following the decision of the court is that any further action they take, such as applying public funds to sustain such illegal structures, will expose the Kano State Government officials involved to criminal prosecution. And, to the state governor who may think that he has immunity against criminal prosecution while in office, it should be noted that not respecting the law is an impeachable offence. So either way, there will be no gain.
Well, the Kano State Government may decide that since it is the law creating the emirates that has been voided, they can follow the RIMI way and create the emirates through official fiat. But that will be something risky and even more dangerous. In the first place, the same official fiat can be used to abolish them later, just as Governor Sabo Bakin Zuwo did after Rimi’s tenure. But more dangerous to the state government then will be the spate of litigations it will open itself to, as well as the criminal charges of applying public resources for illegal purposes.
Therefore, the best thing for the KNSG is to suspend recognition of the new emirates and appeal the judgment. It is only when the judgment is reversed by an appellate court that they can continue to recognise the new emirates. Anything else will, in both the short and long run, prove to be something risky and indeed dangerous to the state government. If I were to advise them, I would simply tell them to enter into a dialogue with all the interested parties to dismantle the now illegal structure quietly and amicably. If they are to rely on an appeal, although I have not seen and read the judgment, from what I have read so far from the press reports, it looks very sound to me.
I rest my case.
Senator Ida, CON is the Sardaunan Katsina