Rights Violation: Court orders Kano govt to pay Emir Bayero N10m damages

A Federal High Court on Friday, ordered the Kano State government to pay N10 million in damages to the 15th Emir of Kano, Alhaji Aminu Ado-Bayero, for breaching his fundamental human rights.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN)  reports that the State House of Assembly on May 23, dissolved all the four newly created Emirate council’s in the state.

NAN reports that Gov. Kabir-Yusuf, on May 23, dethroned Ado-Bayero, and reappointed Sanusi II, as the Emir of Kano, four years after he was dethroned by former Governor Abdullahi Ganduje.

Ado-Bayero, through his counsel, M L Yusufari SAN, had filed a motion exparte dated May 27, seeking the court to restrain the state government  from arresting, intimidating or infringing on his rights.

The other respondents are the Attorney General of the Federation, Attorney General Kano, Nigeria Police, Inspector General of Police, Commissioner of Police Kano, State Security Service, NSCDC, Nigeria Army, Nigerian Navy and Nigerian Airforce.

Counsel to the Kano State Attorney-General,  Mahmoud Abubakar-Magaji, SAN, had urged the court to dismiss and strike out the entire process particularly the originating summons of the applicant motion on Kano Emirate Council (Repeal) Law 2024 and fundamental right.

He argued that the court has no jurisdiction to entertain the case and urged the court to set aside the exparte order it earlier granted retraining the respondents from arresting, intimidating or harassing the applicant.

Delivering its ruling in the matter, Justice Simon Amobeda, described the order given by Gov. Abba Kabir-Yusuf, directing the police to arrest the 15 emir , without any lawful justification as threatening the fundamental rights of the applicant.

This, the judge held is guaranteed under Section 35(1) of the 1999 Constitution (as altered).

“The act of the governor has forced the applicant into house arrest, preventing him from going freely about his lawful business, constitutes a flagrant violation of his fundamental right to freedom of movement as guaranteed under Section 41(1) of the 1999 Constitution,” he held.

He restrained the 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th respondents either by themselves, their agents,servants, privies, or any other person from arresting, detaining, threatening, intimidating and  harassing the applicant or further interfering with the applicant’s fundamental rights.

“The prayer for the cost of filing and prosecuting this suit is refused, the amount having not been specifically pleaded and strictly proved” Amobeda said

Earlier, the second Counsel to the applicant, Mr Michael Jonathan, SAN, said that the court had jurisdiction to entertain and hear the case as it is a fundamental rights suit.

Jonathan urged the court to dismiss the respondent preliminary objection for been unmeritorious and abuse to the court.

NAN