A Federal High Court in Kano has nullified the reinstatement of Muhammadu Sanusi II as the 16th Emir of Kano.
The court’s decision, delivered on Thursday, also invalidated all actions taken following the controversial reinstatement.
Justice Abdullahi Liman, who presided over the case, emphasized the importance of adhering to court orders and due process. The ruling effectively overturns recent governmental actions regarding the emirate.
The court’s decision was taken based on the violation of a previous order to maintain the status quo pending the hearing and determination of motions before the court.
Background
In 2019, the Kano State Government initiated the removal of Muhammadu Sanusi II from the throne of the Emir of Kano.
This controversial decision involved employing kingmakers to select a new Emir, leading to the appointment of Alhaji Aminu Ado Bayero as the 15th Emir of Kano.
The situation escalated in May 2024 when the state government unexpectedly announced through social media channels that Bayero had been deposed as Emir. Authorities issued a 48-hour ultimatum, instructing Bayero to vacate the palace under the threat of arrest for non-compliance.
Emir Bayero’s abrupt removal and the manner in which it transpired raised concerns about the constitutional legitimacy of the government’s actions.
However, this action was taken despite an existing court order to maintain the status quo pending the resolution of ongoing legal disputes.
Court’s Decision
Justice Abdullahi Liman stated, “I hereby order that every step taken by the government is hereby nullified and becomes null and invalid.” The judge clarified that while this decision does not affect the validity of the repealed Emirates Law, it nullifies actions taken by the governor, including his assent to the law and the reappointment of Sanusi.
Justice Liman cited audio evidence of the governor’s statements in both Hausa and English after assenting to the law, concluding that the respondents were aware of the court order to maintain the status quo.
The judge emphasized the seriousness of flouting court orders, stating, “It is a very serious matter for anyone to flout the orders of the court and go scot-free with it.”
The court criticized the respondents for acting according to their “whims and caprices” rather than following due process and complying with the court order. Justice Liman noted that adhering to the legal process would have allowed the respondents to carry out their assignments while respecting the court’s authority.
