CHIEF NWANELO BERNARD ANAELO & ORS v. CHIEF VICTOR MADUAGWUNA & ANOR
(2018)LCN/11829(CA)
In The Court of Appeal of Nigeria
On Wednesday, the 4th day of July, 2018
CA/E/576/2014
RATIO
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT: RIGHT TO ASSOCIATION
“Section 40 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) gives every person the right to assemble freely and associate with other persons and he may form or belong to any association for the protection of his interests. A voluntary association is entitled to make rules and regulations guiding and assisting the association in the running of its affairs. In the instant case, there is no doubt the A.D.U. was formed for the maintenance of peace, good governance, orderliness and progress of the community. The community in furtherance of achieving their aims and objectives made a constitution to guide the affairs of the community. Parties are ad idem that the extant constitution is the one made in 2001 and that the constitution guides the community in its actions and affairs upon the demise of the traditional ruler of the community. Articles 2 and 3 on pages 46 – 47 of the Constitution state that.” PER MISITURA OMODERE BOLAJI-YUSUFF, J.C.A.
JUSTICES
TOM SHAIBU YAKUBU Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria
RITA NOSAKHARE PEMU Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria
MISITURA OMODERE BOLAJI-YUSUFF Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria
Between
1. CHIEF NWANELO BERNARD ANAELO
2. MR. CHUKUWUMA
NWABUFO (President-General Awba
Ofemili Development Union
(ADU)
3. MR. TOBIAS CHIDEBE (General Secretary Awba
Ofemili Development Union (ADU))
4. SIR. JOSEPH OKOYE (Chairman, Chieftaincy
Committee, Awba Ofemili Development Union (ADU)) Appellant(s)
AND
1. CHIEF VICTOR
MADUAGWUNA
2. MR. DAMIAN NWEKE (For themselves and as representing other Concerned citizens of Awba
Ofemili Community Awka North L.G.A) Respondent(s)
MISITURA OMODERE BOLAJI-YUSUFF, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment):
All the parties to this appeal are members of Awba – Ofemili Community in Awka North Local Government Area of Anambra state. It is an autonomous community. The affairs of the community is governed by a constitution referred to as Constitution of Awba Ofemili Community, Awka North Local Government Area of Anambra State of Nigeria,2001.
The community has had two (2) traditional rules, the last of who joined his ancestors in 2005. Since then, the community has been without a traditional ruler. The 1st appellant herein was appointed a regent in accordance with the Constitution of the community. According to the respondents, the Constitution provides for a regency period of Eighteen months but the 1st appellant who was appointed as the regent of the community on 12/10/2006 has continued to act in that capacity.
Aggrieved by the act of the 1st appellant, the respondents by an originating summons filed on 23/4/2013, sought the interpretation of the Constitution of Awba Ofemili Community annexed to the affidavit in support of the originating summons and marked as Exhibit A setting out the facts relied upon and presented the following questions to the High Court of Anambra State, Awka judicial Division for determination:-
1. Whether the tenure of office of the 1st defendant as REGENT Awba Ofemili Community has not expired since 12th May 2008 in accordance with Article 2 (e) Interim Government (page 46 thereof).
2. Whether it is not ripe under the said Constitution for Awba Ofemili people to install a new Igwe of the Community since the demise of their late traditional ruler since 2005 in accordance with Chapter 5, Article 3 (Vii) thereof?
3. Whether it is not the right and turn of Umuokpe Village as the oldest and most senior village to produce the first ‘Igwe 1’ of Awba Ofemili Community under Chapter 5, Article 2 (Viii) thereof
They sought the following reliefs:
(a) A declaration that the tenure of office of the 1st defendant as the REGENT of Awba Ofemili Community Awka North L.G.A having expired since 12th May 2008 he ceased to be the REGENT of Awba Ofemili Community from the said 12th May 2008.
(b) Perpetual injunction restraining the 1st defendant from parading himself in any manner however and whatsoever as the REGENT of Awba Ofemili Community.
(c) A declaration that Awba Ofemili Community is made up of SEVEN villages namely, in order of seniority: Umuokpe, Umuezeavu, Umuchibu, Enugwuagu, Akpana, Ezike and Enugwu.
(d) A declaration that in accordance with the Constitution of Awba Ofemili community 2001, it is the right of Umuokpe Village as the oldest and most senior village to produce the first ‘Igwe 1’ of Awba Ofemili community.
(e) Mandatory injunction compelling the 2nd , 3rd and 4th defendants to commence forthwith the process of selecting and installing a new ‘Igwe 1’ of Awba Ofemili Community.
Parties filed and exchanged affidavits and written addresses. In a considered judgment delivered by Honourable Justice J.C Iguh on 9/12/2013, the Court below answered the questions in the affirmative and granted all the reliefs sought by the respondents.
Dissatisfied with the judgment, the appellants filed a notice of appeal containing five (5) grounds of appeals on 24/12/2013. The five grounds of appeal without their particulars are:
“GROUND ONE
The learned trial Court erred in law when it held that the tenure of the first respondent as regent of Awba Ofemili has expired and that the 1st respondent has since ceased to be the Regent of Awba Ofemili Community despite the extension of the tenure granted to the 1st respondent by Awba Ofemili Community.
GROUND TWO
The learned trial Court erred in law when it held that Awba Ofemili is made up of 7 villages, in order of seniority, Umuokpe, Umuezeavu, Enugwuagu, Akpana, Ezike and Enugwu, contrary to the established 8 villages, at page 52 of Awba Ofemili Constitution 2001, that signed the Constitution into law.
GROUND THREE
The learned trial Court erred in law when it held that in accordance with the Constitution of Awba Ofemili Community 2001, it is the right of Umuokpe Village as the oldest and most senior village to produce the first ‘Igwe I’ of Awba Ofemili Community when infact Umuanyafulu – Umuokpe is the oldest and most senior village in Awba Ofemili Community so entitled.
GROUND FOUR
The learned trial judge erred in law when it made an order that 2nd, 3rd and 4th Respondents shall commence forth – with the process of selecting and installing a new ‘Igwe I’ of Awba Ofemili which by implication excluded the actual first, oldest and most senior village, the Umuanyafulu – Umuokpe.
GROUND FIVE
The learned trial Court erred in law when it failed completely to consider and pronounce on the application for joinder (A/709M/2013) in this suit by Umuanayafulu – Umuokpe village as one of the eighth Villages of Awba Ofemili, thereby denied them any hearing at all before their interest was adjudicated upon.
The appellants’ brief of argument was filed on 22/12/2014. It was settled by Ifeanyi Obiakor. The respondents’ brief was filed on 26/2/2015. It was settled by Chukwuemeka Umeh. The record of appeal was transmitted to this Court on 24/11/14 and deemed as properly transmitted on 26/11/14.
The appellants formulated the following issues for determination.
(i) Whether the letter dated 03/01/2011 Written by Awba Ofemili Community to the Commissioner for Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs, Awka avails the 1st Appellant and entitled him to continue as the Regent of Awba Ofemili Community until a new Igwe is elected and installed. (Ground 1)
(ii) Whether under the various provisions of the Awba Ofemili Constitution, the Community is made up of seven or eight Villages with Umuanyafulu – Umuokpe as the oldest (Grounds 2, 3, and 4).
The respondents formulated the following issues for determination:
1. ?Whether the tenure of office of the 1st appellant as the ‘INTERIM REGENT’ of Awba – Ofemili Community has not expired since 12/5/2008 in accordance with the 2001 Constitution of Awba – Ofemili Community, Chapter 5 Section 2 Article 2 (e) Interim Government (page 46 thereof)
2. Whether the Awba – Ofemili Development Union (A.D.U) can extend the tenure of office of 1st appellant as the ‘REGENT’ of Awba ‘ Ofemili Commuinty contrary to the express provisions of the said 2001 Constitution of the Awba ‘Ofemili Community.
3. Whether Umuokpe is not the oldest and most senior village in Awba – Ofemili Community in accordance with the said 2001 Constitution, Chapter 5 Section 1 Article 2 (viii) Qualification (page 39 thereof).
I noticed that no issue was formulated by the appellants in respect of ground five of the appeal. In law, that ground of appeal is deemed abandoned as it settled law that where no issue is formulated in respect of a ground of appeal. That ground is deemed abandoned and liable to be struck out.
I have considered the issues formulated by the parties along with the grounds of appeal, I find the issues formulated by the appellants to be apt for the determination of this appeal. Issue 1 is whether the letter dated 03/01/2011 written by Awba Ofemili Community to the Commissioner for Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs, Awka avails the 1st appellant and entitled him to continue as the Regent of Awba Ofemili Community until a new Igwe is elected and installed.
The appellants’ Counsel argued that the unanimous decision of the Awba Development Union (ADU), impliedly amended Article 2(e) of Chapter 5 of the Constitution which provided eighteen(18) months period for interim regency and any subsequent amendment to that made on 30/12/2010 can only be made by two – third majority votes that the tenure should end in December, 2012. He submitted that from exhibit D at pages 63 to 68 of the record of appeal, (lines 65 – 66) there was no unanimous decision or even two – third majority to cancel the earlier decision.
He further submitted that the decision of the Court below that exhibit C did not reflect the decision of ADU in their meeting of 26/5/12 is absolutely wrong. He argued that the meeting of 26/5/12 being an illegal meeting cannot supersede the General Meeting of 30/12/2010 which was in compliance with the Constitution. Counsel submitted that the Court below in holding that the regency period whenever a vacancy occurs is eighteen months from the date of Igwe’s death who the parties agreed died in 2005 is more than eighteen months failed to take cognizance of the provision of Article 3 which provides for the last Ofala and Igwe’s burial which in this case took place in December, 2010. He further submitted that Article 2 was construed in isolation from Article 3 which construction can create a vacuum in the leadership and representation of the people which nature itself abhors.
He argued that the Court below should have applied the doctrine of necessity which is recognized in private and public law to avert threatening danger or injury having seen that after the demise of the Igwe in 2005, his last Ofala took place in 2010 and there is no Igwe in place and to apply the express provision of the Construction would leave the community without any representative in government. He referred to Constitutional History of Nigeria by Professor B.O Nwabuze (pages 166 – 177), A.G. OF THE REPUBLIC V. IBRAHIM & ORS. (1964) CYPRUS LAW REPORT, LAKANMI V. A.G (WEST) (1970) 6 NSCC 142.
Counsel stated that the President General who issued the letter for the 1st appellant to continue as regent until a new Igwe is installed stated in exhibit D lines 13 and 14 on pages 67 that he wrote the letter as a result of necessity which the Court below failed to advert its mind to in the consideration of the matter.
In his response, the respondents’ counsel submitted that by virtue of the mandatory provisions of Article 2(b) and (c), Chapter 5 of the Constitution the interim regency of the community cannot exceed eighteen (18) months from the date of Igwe’s death. He argued that the 1st appellant having assumed regency of the community by operation of law on 12/1/2006, his tenure elapsed on 12/5/2008 being the day the constitutional period of eighteen (18) months expired.
He submitted that the tenure of office of the 1st appellant has long expired and he has since ceased to be the regent of the community. It is submitted that Awba Ofemili Development Union (ADU) has no legal capacity and authority whatsoever to extend the tenure of office of the 1st appellant as the regent of the community beyond the constitutional period of Article 2(e), Chapter 5 of the Constitution and it is illegal, unconstitutional and a nullity. He submitted that the appellants’ argument that the decision of ADU in its general meeting of 30/12/10 that the 1st appellant shall continue in office as the interim regent till a new Igwe is installed impliedly amended the constitution is misconceived and mischievous because the provisions of a Constitution cannot be impliedly amended and the provisions of Article 3, Chapter six, Appendix 1 were not complied with at all.
He referred to TANKO V. STATE (2009) 4 NWLR (PT.1131)430 AT 452 (F ? H). He submitted that the constitution cannot be amended by a decision of ADU save in accordance with the provisions of Article 3 Chapter 6 Appendix 1. He urged the Court to strike out all the appellants? arguments on the application of the doctrine of necessity as same was not raised at the Court below and no leave of Court was sought and obtained to raise it. He referred to AULT & WIBORG (NIG) LTD. V. NIBEL IND. LTD (2010) 11 NWLR (PT. 1220) 486 AT 496 (D – E) ONYEMAIZU V. (PT. 1185) 540 AT. 525 (H – E). He further submitted that even if the issue has been properly raised, the Court is urged not to accept it as it would defeat the object and purpose of the Constitution which is to ensure that the regent does not perpetuate himself in office and it is not the duty of this Court to construe any of the provisions of the Constitution to defeat that noble purpose.
RESOLUTION
Section 40 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) gives every person the right to assemble freely and associate with other persons and he may form or belong to any association for the protection of his interests. A voluntary association is entitled to make rules and regulations guiding and assisting the association in the running of its affairs. In the instant case, there is no doubt the A.D.U. was formed for the maintenance of peace, good governance, orderliness and progress of the community. The community in furtherance of achieving their aims and objectives made a constitution to guide the affairs of the community. Parties are ad idem that the extant constitution is the one made in 2001 and that the constitution guides the community in its actions and affairs upon the demise of the traditional ruler of the community. Articles 2 and 3 on pages 46 – 47 of the Constitution state that.
ARTICLE 2: Interim Government
(a) The office of Igwe is not hereditary
(b) Whenever a vacancy occurs by reason of death, resignation, removal etc the Awba – Ofemmili Devolopment Union (ADU) shall select an Igwe elect following the right procedures laid down in the constitution.
(c) Before the selection, presentation and installation of the Igwe, the second in command with the power of interim regent acts as the regent in the interim.
(d) The regent of Igwe will acquire all authority vested on Igwe and will preside over all the meetings of Igwe’s cabinet.
(e) The period of interim will last for eighteen (18) months from the date of Igwe’s death. After eighteen months, interim period expires.
(f) Ofala to take place 12th month. Remaining 6 months for selection and installation of new Igwe.
Article 3: Igwe’s Burial and Last ofala
a. Igwe’s burial and last ofala shall be jointly organized, sponsored and executed by the entire community and member of the family of the deceased.
b. A committee shall be set up to plan and organize the burial and the last ofala. The members of the committee shall include some members of ADU executives, Igwe?s cabinet, deceased Igwe’s family.
Parties who voluntarily join an association are bound by the rules and regulations of the association.
The Court will not interfere with a decision of a voluntary association unless such a decision violates the rules, regulations or the constitution of the association. See MBANEFO V. MOLOKWU & ORS (2014) LPELR 22257 (SC) AT 31 – 33 (G – C), where the Supreme Court stated that:
”It is to be stated that when the appellant entered and became a full member of the Agbalanze Society, he did so with the full Knowledge and freewill to adhere to the rules and regulations guiding it. Therefore, it is not for him to pick and choose which aspect suits him at a given time and which he is at liberty to do away with. To wish to so choose is to first disengage from the association otherwise, he is bound wholly and entirely to what has been provided by the association for the association or members on how its operations are to be conducted. In this regard, I would like to apply the principle as enunciated in the case of Alhaji Balarabe Musa v. Peoples Redemption Party (PRP) (1981) 2 NCLR 763 at 769 per Adefarasin CJ:
“The Court would not interfere in a case like this one where members of a voluntary association have come to a decision within the provisions of their Constitution even if the decision is unreasonable, circumstances have not arisen by which the Court ought to intervene. I am therefore not inclined to quash a resolution of the PRP that PRP Governors should no longer attend institutionalized meeting of Governors. To my mind that resolution does not amount to a violation ofthe fundamental right provided for under Sections 32, 36, 37 and 38 of the Constitution. It is my view that it is still open for the Applicant to attend any meeting he may wish and no one may stop him. But so far as the party is concerned, it is to have the right to discipline its members. As a voluntary association, it has the right to lay down its own decisions even when they are unreasonable. They should be obeyed or the member in disobedience is entitled to quit. The party is in its own right supreme over its own affairs. This must be said loudly and clearly, unless it has violated its own Constitutional provisions the Court would not interfere. The Court will not substitute its own will for that of a political party or any other voluntary association. Those who join clubs, or associations or political parties must be made aware of the perils of membership.
The majority will must prevail whether it is reasonable or unreasonable.”
The contention of the respondent is that the letter dated 31/1/2011 exhibit C which stated that the 1st appellant ‘shall continue in office as the regent of Awba – Ofemili, representing the community in whatever forum or fora in the capacity as the representative of the Traditional Ruler of Awba – Ofemili till a new Igwe is elected and installed’ violates the constitution of ADU. The appellants’ contention is that the decision of ADU contained in exhibit C impliedly amended the constitution. On these contentions, the Court below considered the provisions of the Constitution stated earlier in this judgment and held that:
”It is therefore clear from Article 2 at Pages 46 – 47 of the Constitution of Awba Ofemili that the period of the regent whenever vacancy occurs, either by death, resignation, removal etc is 18 months from the date of Igwe’s death. Therefore, a careful calculation shows that from 2005 when the parties in the suit agreed that their last Igwe died till date is more than 18 months. In fact, it is more than 7 years now. The 18 months from the date the last ‘Igwe’ Awba Ofemili died has since elapsed. Issue No.1 of the applicants is resolved in their favour.
On issue No.2 Article 2 (f) at page 47 of the Constitution of Awba Ofemili (exhibit A) provides: ”Ofala to take place 12th month. Remaining 6 month for selection and installation of new Igwe.”
It is clear from above provision of the constitution of Awba Ofemili when read in conjuction with Article 2(e) of the Constituion of Awba Ofemili that out of the 18 months of the interim period after the date of Igwe’s death, ‘Ofala’ shall take place 12th month and the remaining 6 months shall be for selection and installation of the new Igwe (traditional ruler).
Chapter 5, Article 3(vii) of Awba ofemili Constitution provides:
”After the demise of the incumbent Igwe, a new one should emerge after eighteen (18) months and the installation of new one shall not exceed twelve (12) months.”
The above provision of Article 3(vii) in chapter 5 of the Awba Ofemili Constituion (Exhibit A) is very clear and unambiguous. It is clear therefrom that after 18 months from the date of Igwe?s death, the installation of a new Igwe (traditional ruler) shall not exceed 12 months.
In the instant case, it has exceeded 12 months after the 18 months from the date of the last igwe (traditional ruler) of Awba Ofemili. It is therefore ripe under the Constitution of Awba Ofemili (Exhibit A exhibited to the originating summons) for the Awba Ofemili people to install a new Igwe (traditional ruler) of the Community since the demise of their late traditional ruler in 2005, in accordance with Article 3(vii) in chapter 5 of the Constitution of Awba ofemili.
A voluntary association is created by an agreement of some persons to form an association on certain terms and conditions which are reduced into a written document called the constitution. Though ADU is not a commercial entity, however, I am of the view that members of the community having agreed on their constitution are bound by the letters and the spirit of the constitution. The members of the community clearly intended to be bound by the letters and spirit of the constitution. The members of the community clearly intended to be bound by the provisions of the constitution at least for orderliness and peace in the community. Article 3, Appendix 1 to chapter six of the constitution provides that:
Article 3: Amendment of this Constitution ?This Constitution can be amended under the following conditions:
i. The mover of the motion for the Constitutional amendment must give three (3) months notice of his proposed amendments of A.D.U.
ii. The proposed amendment must be approved by two – third (2/3) majority of members of the executive present and voting.
iii. The proposed amendment must also approved or ratified by two – third (2/3) majority of members of Awba – Ofemmili Development Union in a general meeting.
The provisions of Article 3 of the Constitution are very clear and unambiguous. It is not the contention of the appellants that the provisions of Article 3 were complied with in the amendment of any provision of the constitution. The provisions of Article 3 (Supra) are mandatory and binding on the members of the community and must be strictly complied with in the amendment of any provision of the Constitution. There is nothing in the entire constitution to suggest that its provisions can be amended by implication or through any other means or procedure other than that stated in Article 3 (Supra). The argument of the appellants that exhibit C impliedly amended the constitution cannot fly.
The law is settled that where the language of any statute or instrument or document are clear and unambiguous, the Court would not allow anyone to introduce or import extraneous words or matters into its interpretation and the document must be interpreted as a whole to achieve its objectives paramount among which is doing things which are conducive to peace, good government, orderliness and progress of the town and ‘keeping with the provisions of the constitution.’
The letter exhibits C clearly violated the provisions of the Constitution, in any case exhibit D shows that another decision was taken at the meeting held on 26/5/2012. The Court below was on a firm ground when it held that the tenure of the regency has lapsed.
The minute of the meeting said to have been held on 30/12/2010 where it was allegedly decided that the 1st appellant should continue to act as a regent until a new Igwe is installed was not presented. In the face of the serious allegations contained in the respondents? further affidavit to which the 1st appellant did not file a reply, the decision of the Court below could not have been different. For the above reasons, Issue 1 is resolved against the appellants.
Issue 2 is :Whether under the various provisions of the Awba Ofemili Constitution, the Community is made up of seven or eight villages with Umuanafulu – Umuokpe as the oldest. On this issue, the appellants’ counsel referred to Article 2(ii) and (iii), Chapter 1 and Article 2(viii) chapter 5 of the constitution, he submitted that since the representatives of the eight villages in the community appended their signatures to the Constitution, the Court below was wrong in its interpretation of the constitution and conclusion that Umuokpe is the most senior.
He further submitted that the Court below only considered the interpretation of Section 2(ii) of the Constitution when the provision of the constitution ought to have been read as whole. He referred to PDP V. INEC (2001) FWLR (PT.31) 2735 AT 2780. ADELEKE V. O. S. H. A. (2006) 16 NWLR (PT. 1006) 608 AT 695. He also submitted that the Court below ought to have relied on the preamble/promulgation clause and other sections of the constitution in determining the eight villages in the community. He referred to MAXWELL ON INTERPRETATION OF STATUES, 12TH Edition.
OKOGIE V. A. G. LAGOS STATE (1981) 2 NCLR 337 F. C. S. C. V. LAOYE (1989) 2 NWLR (PT. 106) 652. Counsel submitted that the provision that Awba Ofemili now consists of eight villages has been guiding the community in all their dealings since 2001 as shown in the minutes of the meeting held on 26/5/2012 (exhibit D) at pages 63 – 68.
He argued that if the Court below had considered the entire provisions of the constitution and exhibit D, it would not have come to the conclusion that the community is made up of seven villages and that Umuokpe is the most senior village which interpretation has resulted in absurdity and injustice as it has resulted in the exclusion of Umuonyafulu, the most senior village from participation in the process of selection and installation of the new Igwe.
In response to the above submissions, the respondents’ counsel submitted that no change in the composition of the village that make up Awba – Ofemili Community can legally take place without the amendment of the relevant provisions of the constitution and the onus of proving that the constitution has been so amended lies on the party asserting same. He also submitted that the Court below carried out community reading of the provisions of the constitution before coming to the conclusion that only Article 2(iii), Chapter one of the constitution specifically listed the name of the villages and the order of seniority.
He further submitted that attestation does not form part of the operative sections of a constitution and it cannot override clear and unambiguous operative words of the constitution. He argued that the appellants spoke from both sides of their mouth when they submitted that the meeting held on 26/5/2012 was an illegal meeting but they are relying on the minutes of the meeting exhibit D to support their argument that the community consist of eight villages. Counsel submitted that since the provision of Article 2(iii) Chapter one was clear and unambiguous, the Court below was right to apply it to resolve the confusion created by Article 2(viii), chapter five of the constitution.
RESOLUTION
It is settled law that in the interpretation of a document, no part of the document should be read in isolation. The entire document must be read as a whole. No additional words or clauses should be imported into the document, the Court must confine itself within the four walls of the document. SeeOKWUSIDI V. LADOKE AKINTOLA UNIV.(2011) LPELR 4057 (CA) AT 29 (E). U.B.N. LTD ANOR. V. NWAOKOLO (1995) LPELR 3385 (SC). In respect of the villages that make up of Awba ? Ofemili town or community, Article 2(ii) and (iii) provides that:
In this constitution, the following words or expressions shall have the following meanings in the absence of a contrary intention:
(ii) Awba – Ofemili means the town of Awba Awka North L.G.A. of Anambra State of Nigeria or such L.G.A. as may be determined from time to time, made up of the following villages according to their order of seniority.
(iii) Umuokpe, Umuezeavu, Umuchibu, Enugwuagu, Akpana, Ezike and Enugwu.
The above provision of the constitution is very clear and unambiguous. The villages which make up Awba – Ofemili town are clearly stated in order of seniority. Though Article 2(viii), Chapter 5 of the constitution states that the stool of Igwe of Awba – Ofemili ”shall be rotational among the seven or now eight villages of the town according to seniority” the name of the eight villages was not stated. The Court below considered the two provisions of the constitution and held that:
It is clear from Section 1 Article 2 of the Constitution of Awba Ofemili that Igweship in Ofemili shall be rotational among the seven or now eight villages of the town according to seniority.
Section 1 Article 2 paragraph (ii) and (iii) of chapter 1 of the Constitution of Awba Ofemili provides:
(ii) ‘Awba Ofemili’ means the town of Awba in Awka North L.G.A of Anambra State of Nigeria or such L.G.A as may be determined from time to time, made up of the following villages according to their order of seniority.
(iii) Umokpe, Umuezeavu, Umuchibu, Enugwuagu, Akpana, Ezike and Enugw.
From the above provision of the Constitution of Awba Ofemili, it is clear that in order of seniority of villages in Awba Ofemili Umuokpe is the most senior village. Although, Article 2 paragraph viii in chapter 5 of Exhibit A stated seven or now eight villages of the town, but it did not mention the name of the eight village. Exhibit A specifically mentioned or listed the villages in Awba Ofemili in its Section 1
Article 2 paragraph (iii), which are seven in number. Out of these seven villages Umokpe village is the most senior village of all the other villages mentioned or listed there since it is shown in Section 1 Article 2 paragraph (ii) to be according to their order of seniority.
Though eight villages signed the constitution including Umuanyafuli – Umuokpe and Umuosite Umuokpe, we do not know whether these two villages are the same as the Umuokpe mentioned as the most senior of the seven villages stated under Article 2(iii) (supra) and the Court is not entitled to speculate. The law is settled that where there is a special provision as well as a general provision in respect of a matter, the special provision shall be given full effect and would govern the matter. See F.M.B.N. V. OLLOH (2002) LPELR 1271 (SC) AT 11 – 12 (E – E) GRACE JACK V. UNIV. OF AGRIC MAKURDI (2004) LPELR 1587 (SC). Since Umuanyafulu – Umuokpe was not mentioned as one of the villages that make up Awba – Ofemili Town, the holding of the Court below that Umuokpe is the most senior village according to Article 2(ii) section 1 of chapter one cannot be faulted. Until the constitution is clearly and properly amended to include any other village, no other interpretation can properly be given to the relevant provisions of the constitution. For these reasons, issue 2 is resolved against the appellant.
The appeal fails and it is hereby dismissed. The judgment of the High Court of Anambra State delivered in Suit no. A/122/2013 on 9/12/2013 by Honourable Justice J.C. Iguh is hereby affirmed. Parties shall bear their own costs.
TOM SHAIBU YAKUBU, J.C.A.: The opinion rendered on this appeal, by the HON. JUSTICE MISITURA OMODERE BOLAJI-YUSUFF, J.C.A., represents my feeling and thoughts on the appeal. Therefore, it is my decision too, that the appeal is grossly lacking in merits. It is accordingly, dismissed.
In consequence of the above, the well considered judgment delivered by J.C. Iguh, J., of the Anambra State High Court of Justice, holden at Awka, in re ? Suit No. A/122/2013, on 9th December, 2013, is hereby affirmed.
Each side shall bear own costs.
RITA NOSAKHARE PEMU, J.C.A.: I had read before now, the lead judgment just delivered by my brother – MISITURA OMODERE BOLAJI -YUSUFF, JCA.
I am in agreement with her reasoning and conclusions. I also dismiss the Appeal. The judgment of the Court below is affirmed by me. No order as to costs.
Appearances:
Ifeanyi ObiakorFor Appellant(s)
Chukwuemeka Umeh with him, C.E OkekeFor Respondent(s)
