By Kenneth Okonkwo

On 30th May, 2024, history was made in the United States of America (USA) with the conviction of former President, Donald Trump, on 34 count charges bordering on falsification of business records in a Manhattan District Court. The verdict was delivered by what you can call a regional, state, or district court. Trump is the first former president to be indicted, and convicted for criminal offences. The Manhattan District Attorney, Alvin Bragg, declared that the decision was arrived at without fear or favour, indicating that the law is no respecter of persons. To President Biden it’s a victory for rule of law.

It’s important to note that the judiciary in America didn’t just give judgements that are adverse to Donald Trump because he has become an ex-president. While Donald Trump was in power and dished out unfounded allegations that the 2020 presidential election was rigged in favour of President Biden, the judiciary struck out more than 60 cases he brought against the election within 2 months of his filing the cases and before the swearing in of Joe Biden. Among the judges that delivered the judgements were appointees of Donald Trump. He was one of the very few privileged Presidents who had the unique opportunity to appoint 3 Supreme Court Justices within the first term (4 years) of his regime, yet for the sake of rule of law and the salvation of democracy in America, the judges stood firm and resisted every attempt by the former president to use the instrumentality of the judiciary to scuttle democracy and institute fraudulent elections in America. The former president is still facing 3 other criminal charges in Florida, Atlanta Georgia, and Washington D. C. Trump is the presumptive Republican candidate in the next election, yet the judicial system maintains that justice must take its due course.

Just to drive home this point, Hunter Biden, the only surviving son of President Joe Biden, a sitting United States President, is facing trial on some counts of evading paying taxes and illegal possession of firearms. The Secretary of Justice, appointed by Joe Biden, selected a special counsel to prosecute the President’s son just to ensure that justice should not only be done but seen as done. The son is about to appear in court soonest. Nobody is advocating that he should be preferentially treated because he is the President’s son. It’s obvious that the judiciary is the sustainer of democracy in America. On the day the judiciary falters, American democracy will fall. In the US, the court is really the last hope of everybody and every institution. Even as Trump was convicted, he may still be allowed to contest the 2024 presidential election because there’s no law in the US that forbids him. The people are the ultimate decider in the November presidential election of 5th November, 2024. The rule of law protects the rights of everyone, even a convicted felon.

Coming back home, the only reason our democracy is in peril is because of judicial rascality. Despite all warnings by the Chief Justice of Nigeria and the National Judicial Council (NJC), the judges have operated as an island on their own, interpreting the laws they made on the bench, bereft of the imprimatur of the legislature. The judges have usurped the powers of the executive, and the legislature from the bench with the instrumentality of ex-parte orders – a harmless equitable remedy that was initiated to protect innocent citizens from irreparable damage, has now become weaponised by incompetent and sometimes corrupt judges, to be destroying the rights of Nigerians and institutions with reckless abandon.

The latest being the debacle of the traditional war between the former Emir of Kano, Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, who was allegedly re- appointed to occupy the seat for which he was earlier deposed, but allegedly restrained by court from being reinstated, and former/present Emir of Kano, Ado Bayero, who was removed from office and allegedly reinstated by the courts. In effect, due to judicial rascality, we have two emirs now occupying the ancient throne of Kano Emirate. An abomination one can say? These judges can go to any length to pervert justice and desecrate our democracy. At the belly of this traditional war is a perceived political war between the Kwakwansiya group and the Ganduje group. Governor Yusuf even made it a campaign issue. Rather than lending itself to be the hope of the restoration of peace on the throne, the judiciary has rendered itself to be the conduit for the desecration of the throne. It is obvious that the Nigerian judiciary is becoming the lost hope of the common man, and a present danger to our democracy. The traditional war going on in Kano cannot be seen differently from a political calculation on who will win the 2027 general elections in Kano State.

Let us admit that the issues are not as simple as it appears. The facts of this matter was that Emir Sanusi was enthroned as the Emir of Kano pursuant to the death of Emir Ado Bayero, who is the biological father of Emir Ado Bayero Jnr. The House of Assembly divided the Kano Emirate into 5 during the regime of Governor Ganduje. Eventually, Emir Sanusi was dethroned for alleged insubordination to the state government. Ado Bayero was installed as the Emir of Kano to replace Emir Sanusi. It’s important at this juncture to point out that Ado Bayero didn’t ascend the throne of Kano emirate due to the balkanization of the emirate into five, neither did Emir Sanusi lose his seat because the emirate was divided into 5. So the enlargement or shrinking of the size of the emirate does not affect the validity of the throne of the Kano emir. It was then surprising when Governor Yusuf declared that the stool of Emir Ado Bayero had become vacant simply because the law as to size of the emirate has been affected. The law is very clear, the Emir can only be dethroned if he misconducts himself or commits any offence. In the absence of stating any offence that Emir committed, it is doubtful whether Emir Ado Bayero was rightly removed from office. The Governor should have brought an allegation against Bayero and deposed him rather than rely on an amendment of a law to remove him. The legislature cannot perform executive function so the amendment cannot engineer an automatic removal from office of the emir. You cannot affect the rights of a Nigerian by making a retroactive law.

But this is the reason why we have the courts – to resolve the issues peacefully and avoid a breakdown of law and order. Ado Bayero was right when he approached a High Court to seek an ex-parte injunction restraining the reinstatement of Emir Sanusi because his rights may forever be affected if Sanusi is reinstated. The position of the law is that court’s orders should be obeyed no matter how perverse. The Governor didn’t have any right to choose the ones to obey and the ones to disobey. However, the Federal High Court Judge didn’t obey the law when he issued that ex-parte order pending the determination of the suit before him. This is a way of denying Emir Sanusi the right to be heard timely before his rights are affected. The position of the law is that no ex-parte order can be issued by any judge except the ex-parte motion was filed together with a motion on notice that will allow the defendant the opportunity to be heard before making an interlocutory injunction pending the determination of the suit. Ex-parte order is always issued before the other party is heard and it’s made to be terminated within 7 days, and if it’s renewed, for a maximum of 14 days and it dies a natural death except the Judge replaces it with an interlocutory injunction after hearing the motion on notice. With this, the judge will not offend the right to fair hearing of both parties.

To complicate the matter, a High Court of Kano State, a court of cordinate jurisdiction, issued a contradicting ex-parte order, ordering that Ado Bayero should vacate the seat and should stop parading himself as the emir. The FHC issued another order directing that Sanusi vacates the palace. What a confusion! The position of the law is that once a court is seized of a matter, another court of cordinate jurisdiction is not allowed to adjudicate on same matter. Any party who doesn’t like the rulings and decisions of the court should appeal them. The Judge of the High Court of Kano State, shouldn’t have issued contradictory orders on same matter.

Courts in Kano State did same thing on the Ganduje National Chairman of APC debacle where two High Courts of coordinate jurisdiction issued two contradicting ex-parte orders, one asking Ganduje to go and another asking Ganduje to stay. Confusion everywhere. It also happened with the Abure case, where a court in Abuja asked Abure to go as Chairman of Labour Party, while another one of coordinate jurisdiction in Benin asked Abure to stay. Because the two orders came same day, one can even excuse the judges on the ground that none of them is serving on appeal against the other. But the question is, how can two different courts be adjudicating on the same matter with the same facts, and reach different conclusions? It shows that there must be incompetence or corruption lurking somewhere in the background, and law is no longer certain.

It’s encouraging to hear the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Olukayode Ariwoola, summon the judges from Kano for consultations. If the CJN does not act decisively to protect our judiciary by sanctioning severely these erring judges, our democracy is doomed. This Kano debacle aslo justifies why traditional institutions should be left to local authorities. Can you imagine what chaos would have occurred in Kano if it’s perceived that it’s a President from another tribe or religion that is causing what goes on in Kano. Please the National Assembly should jettison any idea of removing the issue of the traditional society from being under the States.