In a significant development in the ongoing Kano emirship tussle, Abdul Muhammed, SAN, and other counsels representing the 15th Emir of Kano, Aminu Ado-Bayero, have withdrawn their legal services. This announcement was made before the Kano State High Court.
The case involves multiple applicants: the Attorney General of Kano State, the Speaker of the Kano State House of Assembly, and the Kano State House of Assembly. They are seeking an order to restrain Ado-Bayero and four other dethroned emirs from Bichi, Rano, Gaya, and Karaye from parading themselves as emirs.
The respondents in this matter include Ado-Bayero, Alhaji Nasiru Ado-Bayero (Emir of Bichi), Dr. Ibrahim Abubakar II (Emir of Karaye), Alhaji Kabiru Muhammad-Inuwa (Emir of Rano), and Alhaji Aliyu Ibrahim-Gaya (Emir of Gaya). Additionally, the Inspector General of Police, Director of State Security Service, Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps, and Nigeria Army are also respondents.
During the recent hearing, counsel for Ado-Bayero, Muhammed, presented an affidavit of fact dated July 3, accompanied by a notice of appeal and a motion for a stay of proceedings. He requested the court to stay proceedings pending the outcome of the appeal. Muhammed stated, “We were served with the court processes this morning by the applicants.” He also sought an adjournment to respond, which the court denied. Subsequently, Muhammed and his colleagues applied for the withdrawal of their legal services.
Hassan Tanko-Kyaure, representing the third, fourth, and fifth respondents, moved an application for an extension of time and a counter affidavit in response to the originating motion. He urged the court to set aside the Kano State Emirates Council (Repeal) Law 2024, arguing that due process was not followed. He also requested the court to dismiss the applicant’s application with a cost of N1 billion.
Counsel for the Inspector-General of Police, Mr. Sunday Ekwe, stated that they had nothing to present, leaving everything to the court’s discretion.
On the other side, counsel for the applicant, Mr. Eyitayo Fatogun, urged the court to discountenance the respondent’s affidavit of facts, arguing that it was merely a delay tactic. He emphasized that the motion referred to a proposed notice of appeal rather than an actual notice of appeal. “The motion also refers to a proposed notice of appeal, not a notice of appeal. It indicates that the affidavit of facts is just to delay the proceedings. My Lord, the business of today is for the hearing of all pending applications,” Fatogun argued.
In her ruling, Justice Amina Adamu-Aliyu refused the respondent’s application for a stay of proceedings, stating, “The respondent did not disclose any special fact to warrant any stay of proceedings.” The judge then adjourned the matter till July 18 to rule on several applications, including the extension of time, a notice of preliminary objection, setting aside the ex parte order, a joinder application, and a motion for the judge to recuse herself.
This case stems from a May 27 court order granting an interim injunction that restrains the first to fifth respondents from parading themselves as Emirs. This was in response to the Kano State House of Assembly’s dissolution of four newly created Emirate councils on May 23 during Governor Umar Ganduje’s tenure, which led to the reappointment of Lamido Sanusi as the Emir of Kano by Governor Abba Kabir-Yusuf.
