Leader of Indigenous
People of Biafra, IPOB, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu
The Appeal court judgement on the case read by Lord Denning in Agbor v.
Metropolitan Police Commissioner (reported in the London Weekly Law
Reports, Vol. 1 of 1968), makes a compelling reading. Lord Denning said
…”There is a civil war flaring in Nigeria. Sparks from it have come down
in London. Some have landed on No. 35 Woodstock Road, London, NW 11.
In 1965, the house was bought by the government of the Eastern Region of
Nigeria. It was occupied by one of their senior officers. In 1966, a
Federal Military Government was set up in Nigeria. It was then arranged
that an officer of the Federal Government of Nigeria should occupy the
ground floor of No. 35 Woodstock road, while the first floor of No. 35
Woodstock road, remained occupied by an officer of the Eastern region.
Afterwards, civil war broke up in Nigeria. The Eastern Region seceded.
It calls itself the Republic of Biafra. But this house remained occupied
as before. The Federal officer was on the ground floor. The Biafran
officer was on the first floor.
“Now, we come to January of this year, 1969. On the ground floor, there
was a Mohammed, who was on the Diplomatic staff of the Federal
Government of Nigeria. On the first floor was a Mr Onuma, who regarded
himself as being employed by the Republic of Biafra. Mr Mohammed on the
ground floor decided to leave. But the Nigerian High Commission still
intended to keep possession of the ground floor.
They arranged for decorators to come in. They intended, after the
decorators had finished, to put another of their officers at the ground
floor. On the very day Mr Mohammed left, the decorators came in. But
they left at 9.00 o’clock at night. They left the place locked up. But
the Biafrans on the top floor had been keeping watch. They knew that Mr
Mohammed had gone. They had themselves got a key of the ground floor.
They got into the ground floor and installed a family of the Biafrans
into it.
They put in Mrs Agbor, her husband and six children. The family occupied
the ground floor. An hour later, two men came from the Nigerian High
Commission. They tried to get into the ground floor. But the Biafrans
kept them out. On the next day, January 5, 1969, some 20 Nigerians came
and sought to turn out the Biafrans but the police persuaded them to go
away. The Biafrans then went to their Solicitors, Linklaters and Paines.
They wrote to the Nigerian High Commission, which did nothing to evict
Mrs Agbor and her family. Then, suddenly on March 7, early in the
morning, the police came and told her she must leave. They said they
were authorised by the Home Office on behalf of the Nigerian High
Commission. The police officers bundled her out of the house, including
her husband and children. Her Solicitors issued a writ on her behalf to
challenge this eviction. They asked for an order to restore her back to
the house. The judge in chambers refused to make such an order. They
then went to the court of appeal.
The appeal court ruled in favour of Mrs Agbor.
Said Lord Denning:” The plain fact here is that Mr and Mrs Agbor’s claim
of right to be entitled to the the possession of the ground floor of
the house. They entered by stealth. They used a key that had been left
behind. But they did it under a claim of right. It may be that they had
no such right as they claimed. But even so, the proper way to evict her
was by application to a court of law. No one is entitled to take
possession of premises by strange hand or with a multitude of people.
This has been forbidden since the statute of Richard 11 against forcible
entry…The police must not take laws into their hands. If she must be
turned out, it has to be by due process of law and not by action of the
executive…In my judgement, this court should make an interim order that
she be restored to her possession of this flat. I would allow the appeal
accordingly.”
Read more at: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2017/11/biafra-defeated-nigeria-london-court/
Read more at: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2017/11/biafra-defeated-nigeria-london-court/
Leader of Indigenous
People of Biafra, IPOB, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu
The Appeal court judgement on the case read by Lord Denning in Agbor v.
Metropolitan Police Commissioner (reported in the London Weekly Law
Reports, Vol. 1 of 1968), makes a compelling reading. Lord Denning said
…”There is a civil war flaring in Nigeria. Sparks from it have come down
in London. Some have landed on No. 35 Woodstock Road, London, NW 11.
In 1965, the house was bought by the government of the Eastern Region of
Nigeria. It was occupied by one of their senior officers. In 1966, a
Federal Military Government was set up in Nigeria. It was then arranged
that an officer of the Federal Government of Nigeria should occupy the
ground floor of No. 35 Woodstock road, while the first floor of No. 35
Woodstock road, remained occupied by an officer of the Eastern region.
Afterwards, civil war broke up in Nigeria. The Eastern Region seceded.
It calls itself the Republic of Biafra. But this house remained occupied
as before. The Federal officer was on the ground floor. The Biafran
officer was on the first floor.
“Now, we come to January of this year, 1969. On the ground floor, there
was a Mohammed, who was on the Diplomatic staff of the Federal
Government of Nigeria. On the first floor was a Mr Onuma, who regarded
himself as being employed by the Republic of Biafra. Mr Mohammed on the
ground floor decided to leave. But the Nigerian High Commission still
intended to keep possession of the ground floor.
They arranged for decorators to come in. They intended, after the
decorators had finished, to put another of their officers at the ground
floor. On the very day Mr Mohammed left, the decorators came in. But
they left at 9.00 o’clock at night. They left the place locked up. But
the Biafrans on the top floor had been keeping watch. They knew that Mr
Mohammed had gone. They had themselves got a key of the ground floor.
They got into the ground floor and installed a family of the Biafrans
into it.
They put in Mrs Agbor, her husband and six children. The family occupied
the ground floor. An hour later, two men came from the Nigerian High
Commission. They tried to get into the ground floor. But the Biafrans
kept them out. On the next day, January 5, 1969, some 20 Nigerians came
and sought to turn out the Biafrans but the police persuaded them to go
away. The Biafrans then went to their Solicitors, Linklaters and Paines.
They wrote to the Nigerian High Commission, which did nothing to evict
Mrs Agbor and her family. Then, suddenly on March 7, early in the
morning, the police came and told her she must leave. They said they
were authorised by the Home Office on behalf of the Nigerian High
Commission. The police officers bundled her out of the house, including
her husband and children. Her Solicitors issued a writ on her behalf to
challenge this eviction. They asked for an order to restore her back to
the house. The judge in chambers refused to make such an order. They
then went to the court of appeal.
The appeal court ruled in favour of Mrs Agbor.
Said Lord Denning:” The plain fact here is that Mr and Mrs Agbor’s claim
of right to be entitled to the the possession of the ground floor of
the house. They entered by stealth. They used a key that had been left
behind. But they did it under a claim of right. It may be that they had
no such right as they claimed. But even so, the proper way to evict her
was by application to a court of law. No one is entitled to take
possession of premises by strange hand or with a multitude of people.
This has been forbidden since the statute of Richard 11 against forcible
entry…The police must not take laws into their hands. If she must be
turned out, it has to be by due process of law and not by action of the
executive…In my judgement, this court should make an interim order that
she be restored to her possession of this flat. I would allow the appeal
accordingly.”
Read more at: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2017/11/biafra-defeated-nigeria-london-court/
Read more at: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2017/11/biafra-defeated-nigeria-london-court/
I have read the
positions of both parties over the alleged forceful eviction of Mrs
Tejuosho and her family from her house by the agents of Lagos State
government and/or of Lagos State House of Assembly.
I don’t know who is right or wrong. Since the matter is in court, we
await the decision of the court.
What is however trite is that you can’t evict someone from an abode,
even an illegal occupant, without a court order. Unfortunately,
supporters from both sides of the divide, are digging in. I am not
interested in their politics. Just that the due process be followed.
I remember the famous case of OJUKWU v. LAGOS STATE GOVERNMENT over the
forceful eviction of the Ikemba from his Villaska lodge (29 Queens
drive, Ikoyi, Lagos) during the pendency of the case initiated by Ojukwu
to stop his eviction.
Ojukwu had on October 10, 1985, filed an ex parte application to
restrain the military Governor from ejecting him and his family. From
the High court, it went to the court of appeal. But during the pendency
of the appeal, the Lagos State government evicted Ojukwu. The court
ordered the Lagos State government to restore Ojukwu to the house, an
ORDER that was ignored by the government. Rather, it went to the
Supreme court which led to the term “Executive lawlessness” by Kayode
Eso, JSC in his leading judgement.
A similar scenario played out during Nigeria’s civil war.
As the clatter of fireworks raged on during Nigeria’s civil war 50 years
ago, unknown to Nigerians, the Biafran and Nigerian governments were
also pursuing the case at a British court.
Read more at: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2017/11/biafra-defeated-nigeria-london-court/
Read more at: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2017/11/biafra-defeated-nigeria-london-court/
No comments:
Post a Comment
https://saviournicodemus.blogspot.com