Yesterday, the Kano state government held an executive council
meeting presided over by Governor Abdullahi Umar Ganduje. At the said
meeting the Emir of Kano, Sanusi Lamido Sanusi was accused of having
disrespected the Governor by not attending official meetings and
displaying utter disdain for constituted authority.
And
without giving the Emir any opportunity to react to the allegations the
executive council tried him, found him guilty and announced his removal
from the throne. Apart from deposing the Emir without affording him the
opportunity to defend himself Governor Ganduje was the accuser, the
prosecutor, witness and judge at the inquisition which lasted for about 5
minutes. At the end of the inquisition the accused was convicted and
sentenced to dethronement. As if the reckless violations of the Emir’s
right to fair hearing were not sufficient Governor Ganduje proceeded to
order the indefinite restriction of the deposed Emir’s movement and
indefinite detention at Loko, Nasarawa State.
Thus,
the fundamental rights of Sanusi Lamido Sanusi to personal liberty and
freedom of locomotion guaranteed by sections 35 and 41 of the
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended and
article 6 and 12 of the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights
(Ratification and Enforcement Act Cap A9, Laws of the Federation of
Nigeria 2004 have also been violated. Since the Kano state government
lacks the power to abrogate the fundamental rights of Sanusi Lamido
Sanusi without following a procedure permitted by law his banishment and
detention in Nasarawa State are illegal in every material particular.
At
the time the British colonial regime engaged in the dethronement,
banishment, restriction of movement and detention of traditional rulers
who opposed the looting of the resources of the colonial territory of
Nigeria the fundamental rights of all colonial subjects were not
recognised in spite of the much touted Magna Carta. Hence, some of the
traditional rulers who were deposed and banished to remote islands
abroad where they were killed. The Britain colonial regime got away with
such atrocities because colonial powers at the material time operated
outside the ambit of law and civilised standards. But under the current
democratic dispensation in Nigeria no state government has the power to
remove a traditional ruler and subject him to banishment and detention
without following due process.
In
the case of Attorney General & Commissioner of Justice, Kebbi State
vs. HRH Al- Mustapha Jokolo (2013) LPELR-22349 the Court of Appeal (per
ADUMEIN, J.C.A.) held inter alia:
“The
Governor of Kebbi State has no right to act outside the clear and
unambiguous provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of
Nigeria, 1999 (applicable to this case). Section 35 (1) of the said
Constitutionprovides that every citizen of Nigeria is
“entitled to his personal liberty and no person shall be deprived of
such liberty” except in the circumstances set out in subsections (a) to
(f) thereof.Section 40 of the same Constitution provides that
“every person is entitled to assemble freely and associate with other
persons“. On the issue at hand, Section 41(1) of the Constitution is
germane and it provides thus: ’41 – (1) Every citizen of Nigeria is
entitled to move freely throughout Nigeria and to reside in any part
thereof, and no citizen of Nigeria shall be expelled from Nigeria or
refused entry thereto or exit therefrom. (2) Nothing in subsection (1)
of this section shall invalidate any law that is reasonably justifiable
in a democratic society – (a) imposing restrictions on the residence or
movement of any person who has committed or is reasonable suspected to
have committed a criminal offence in order to prevent him from leaving
Nigeria; or (b) providing for the removal of any person from Nigeria to
any other country to – (i) be tried outside Nigeria for any criminal
offence, or (ii) undergo imprisonment outside Nigeria in execution of
the sentence of a court of law in respect of a criminal offence of which
he has been found guilty: Provided that there is reciprocal agreement
between Nigerian and such other country in relation to such matter. The
appellant has not been able to show that the banishment of the 1st
respondent from Gwandu Emirate in Kebbi State and his deportation to Obi
in Nasarawa State were in accordance with the clear provisions of
Section 41 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999.
The banishment and deportation from Kebbi State by the Governor of
Kebbi State, on or about the 3rd of June, 2005 of the 1st respondent to
Lafia in Nasarawa State and later to Obi, also in Nasarawa State, is
most unconstitutional, and illegal. By the said banishment and
deportation, the 1st respondent has been, unduly and wrongfully denied
his constitutional rights ‘to respect for the dignity of his person’;
‘to assemble freely and associate other persons’ – including the people
of Gwandu Emirate of Kebbi State; and to ‘move freely throughout Nigeria
and to reside in any part thereof’ as respectively provided in the
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999.”
Therefore,
the Kano State Government should release Sanusi forthwith and allow him
to enjoy his fundamental rights to personal liberty and freedom of
locomotion as well as the right to contest his removal from the Kano
throne if he so desires.