ODUMUYIWA ASHEKOYA Vs GANIYU JAIEOLA OLAWUNMI
September 5, 2025THE QUEEN VS ELEMI EJA ESEGE & ORS
September 5, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1962-03) Legalpedia 68393 (SC)
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Holden at Lagos
Mon Mar 5, 1962
Suit Number: SC 421/1961
CORAM
ADEMOLA, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
UNSWORTH, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
BAIRAMIAN, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
ODUMUYIWA ASHEKOYA
APPELLANTS
GANIYU JAIEOLA OLAWUNMI
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
CHIEFTAINCY MATTER-INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellant/complainant in a chieftaincy matter and at his instance the defendant/respondent was prosecuted for an offence under Section 17(1) of the chiefs Law 1957 (Western Region) in that he, not being a person approved as a successor by the Governor-in-Council to the recognised vacant Chieftaincy of the Elepe of Epe in Epe Quarter, Offin in Shagamu Local Council area, permitted himself to be installed as the Elepe.
HELD
This appeal will, therefore, be allowed.
ISSUES
Is merely the interpretation to be put to Section 17(1) of the Chiefs Law (Cap. 19 of the Western Region) 1957.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
PROPER INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 17 (1) OF THE CHIEFS LAW (CAP. 19 OF THE WESTERN REGION) 1957.
‘I do not think Section 17 (l) was drafted with the intention of creating any distinction whatever between the person who installs and the person who permits himself to be installed.’ Per ADEMOLA C.J.F.
PROPER INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 17 (1) OF THE CHIEFS LAW (CAP. 19 OF THE WESTERN REGION) 1957.
‘The mischief aimed at by Section 17( 1) is the performance of a ceremony which the parties thereto intend to be regarded by the public as an installation and it makes no difference whether or not the rites were carried out perfectly in accordance with the local law and custom. The Section, therefore, deems it an offence by both the installer and the installed whether or not the ceremony performed was perfect, if the installation or the “purported” installation took place before the Governor-in-Council approved a successor to the vacant stool.’ Per ADEMOLA C. J. F.
EFFECT OF INSTALLING IMPROPER PERSONS
‘It was in my view never intended by the legislature that there should be a difference; that the installer, if the ceremony was imperfect, be guilty of an offence whilst the person installed, should the ceremony be proved imperfect by reason of the fact that it was not in accordance with the local custom, should go unpunished, was certainly not intended. The object was to await the approval of the Governor-in-Council before any installation takes place.’ Per ADEMOLA C. J. F.
CASES CITED
Not Available
STATUTES REFERRED TO
The chiefs Law 1957 (Western Region)
