The Kogi Government has filed an appeal before the Court of Appeal in Abuja against the removal of the Ohinoyi of Ebiraland, Tijani Ahmed-Anaje, by a state High Court.
Justice Umar Salisu of Lokoja High Court had on Monday ordered the sack of the paramount ruler in a case filed by Daudu Adeku-Ojiah, Hussain Yusuf and Abdulrahaam Suberu as 1st, 2nd and 3rd plaintiffs and challenged the appointment of Ahmed-Anaje by former governor Yahaya Bello as the Ohinoyi of Ebiraland.
The plaintiffs, represented by Mr Lawal Rabana (SAN), had sued Governor Ahmed Ododo; the State Attorney General, Muzi Abdullahi; and the Ohinoyi of Ebiraland, Ahmed-Anaje; as 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants in the case which began in okene before its transfer to Lokoja.
The three plaintiffs had pleaded with the court to make a declaration that the procedure adopted in appointing the 3rd Defendant to the throne of Ohinoyi of Ebiraland was wrongful and unlawful.
They also argued that the process was contrary to the Procedure of Ascension to the Throne of Ohinoyi of Ebira Land, Edict No 3 of 1997guiding the appointment of Ohinoyi of Ebiraland.
Ododo and the attorney-general in their appeal, which has Adeku-Ojiah, Yusuf, and Suberu as 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Respondents, challenged the decision of the lower court.
But the state Attorney General, Mr Muzi Abdullahi (SAN), on Tuesday said an appeal has been filed at the Court of Appeal in Abuja
In the reliefs sought, the state government pleaded with the appellate court to allow the appeal and give an order setting aside the decision of the lower court.
They also prayed the court to dismiss the suit of the 1st to 3rd Respondents at the trial court for lacking in merit.
They said that the ruling in HCO/12c/2006 that is Exhibit 1, relied upon by the 1st to 3rd Respondents was an interlocutory ruling in respect of processing, nomination, selection and appointment of some set of persons at the time, as Ohis to the five districts of Okengwe/Okene, Eia, lhima, Adavi and Eganyi.
In their five grounds of appeal, they alleged that “the Learned Trial Judge erred in Law and reached a perverse decision when he placed heavy reliance on Exhibit P.O 4 annexed to an “Affidavit of Facts in Response to the 1s, 2nd and 3rd Defendants Notice of Preliminary Objection.”
“The Learned Trial Court erred in law and reached a perverse decision to the detriment of the Appellants when it relied on an interlocutory decision in suit no:- HCO/12c/2006 between Dr Habibu Angulu Sani v the Kogi Govt & 5 Ors,” they alleged.
They argued that the trial Judge erred in law and same occasioned a miscarriage of justice against the Appellant when he assumed jurisdiction to hear and determine this instant suit when in actual, he lacked jurisdiction.
They also argued that the judgment of the court was against the weight of evidence presented at the trial.
The claimants, however, prayed the court to allow the appeal and dismissed case of the respondents and the judgement of the lower court.
