The Odofin Of Odo -Oja Ikere Ekiti, High Chief Tope Ijasan has urged the general public to disregard the purpoted news story being circulated on the social media under the caption “Supreme Court Upholds Appeal Court Ruling Confirms Olukere’s appointment Illegal” .
Ijasan Who spoke to newsmen on Friday in Ikere-Ekiti said that the clarification became imperative due to how the development had created tension in the town, state and across the country.
“We have been inundated with calls and messages concerning the verdict of the court on the tussle between the Olukere and the Ogoga Of Ikere-Ekiti. We had chosen to ignore this wicked fabrication until it appeared that certain people sought to draw mileage from the disinformation”.
‘Security agents across the country have been urged to be on the look out and bring the harbinger of the fake news story to justice and tell Nigerians the source of his story which totally contradicted what actually happened at the Apex court”.
Ijasan Who was so furious at the development advised Journalists to always get their facts accurately before they are published, adding that such would vindicate them from running into the barbwire of contempt of the court at all times.
According to him, the case before the Appellate Court has nothing to do with the Olukere and his staff of office, but the prayers of the state government urging the court to exclude them from the legal tussle between the two traditional institutions.
“The issue that went to the Appeal Court from the High Court has nothing to do with Olukere and his staff of office. It was a motion that the state government took to court that they should exclude them from the case instituted by the Ogoga”.
“And that the issue of Aladejana Panel was statue barred. The High Court gave the ruling in favour of the State government. that they should be excluded from the case, that the Aladejana panel was statue barred. After the ruling, the Ogoga group appealed against the High court ruling, praying the appeal court reinstate the State government and Attorney General back into the case they instituted, and the Court ruled in their favour and directed the case back to the Chief judge to be reassigned to another judge for trial”.
“The issue of autonomy granted Odo-Oja community in Ikere Local Government by the State government and the Olukere as the king was never in contention before the court of Appeal and the Appellate Judges affirmed that they could not issue order on what were not before the court, and the issues were yet to be tried at High court”.
He pointed out that, the two issues raised above were the appeal of the state government praying the supreme Court to accept the ruling High court, excluding them and agree with them that Aladejana’s panel report was statue barred.
Ijasan noted that the state government in their wisdom withdrew the appeal before supreme Court and matter was struck out.
They have the relief with the court. So the Appeal Court said go back to the High Court. State government go and join them. Then the issue of Aladejana, let the High Court determine it.
On his part Lead counsel to Olukere, Morakinyo Ogele (Esq) posited that; the fake news now goes viral that Court has ordered Olukere of Ikere-Ekiti, Oba Ganiyu Obasoyin not to parade himself as Olukere of Ikere-Ekiti not only ridiculous, but primitive fake information emanated from the dirty minds of those who have been long advocating for the removal of Olukere stool in Ikere local government.
“The issue of removing Olukere or denying him of his staff of office did not arise at all, Ogoga supporters were only out to cause trouble in the ancient town, only God can remove Olukere as he has established himself before Ogoga came to the town as a hunter”.
Ogele further clarified that the Appeal marked CA/EK/102/2021 was before Justice Oyebisi Omoleye, presiding judge Court of Appeal, Justice T. O Awotoye, Justice Court of Appeal and Justice Abdul-Azeez Waziri, Justice Court of Appeal.
The Respondents in the case were Oba Ganiyu Ayodele Ọbàsọyin, Who is the first respondent, Commissioner of Police, Èkìtì State Command, 2nd respondent, the Attorney-General Èkìtì State, 3rd respondent and Governor Èkìtì State 4th respondent.
“In the judgement delivered by Justice T. O. Awotoye JCA, affirmed that the Learned Counsel to the 3RD & 4TH Respondents submitted the issue before this honourable court was the striking out of name of the 3RD & 4TH Respondents and nothing more. The issue of the Olukere chieftaincy and autonomy granted to odo-oja community in Ikere is not before this court and therefore this court cannot make any order in respect thereof”.
Justice Awotoye ruled that “I have deeply considered the diverse issues formulated by parties in this appeal. I shall determine this appeal however is the light of the issues postulated by the appellants being the aggrieved in this appeal.
“At this stage it is important for me to remind myself that this is an interlocutory appeal. and I must warn myself of the risk of pre-determining an Issue which should be determined at the final stage of the hearing at the lower court”.
“According to WALI JSC in OSAGIE II & ANOR vs. OFFOR & ANOR (1998) 3NWLR PART 541 p.205, Being an interlocutory appeal, one must be brief and avoid making any observation in the judgment which might prejudge that main issue yet to be tried (See for example OJUKWU vs. GOVERNOR OF LAGOS STATE (1972) 1 ANLR (PT95″ See also OTTI & ANOR vs. OGAH & ORS (2017) 7NWLR (PT. 1563)1”.
In view of the above. “I consider it wise to state that issues 1 and 2 formulated by the appellants are resolved in their favour”.
-This interlocutory appeal has merit. It is hereby allowed.
The order striking out the names of the 3rd and 4th Respondent by the lower court is hereby set aside.
-In other words the Ruling of the High Court of Ekiti State, Ado-Ekiti Judicial Division in HAD/8/2018 delivered on 8/10/21 is hereby set aside.e
-Suit No. HAD/8/2018 IS HEREBY REMITTED BACK TO THE HON. CHIEF JUDGE OF EKIT! STATE FOR RE-ASSIGNMENT TO ANOTHER High Court Judge other than ADEYEYEw (Ag. C. J) for fresh hearing de novo.
The Court ruled.
Source:Tunde Akinlabi
