The Kogi government has filed an appeal before the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal against the removal of the Ohinoyi of Ebiraland, Tijani Ahmed-Anaje, by a state High Court.

Muzi Abdullahi, the Kogi Attorney General, the second claimant in the appeal, made this known to journalists in Lokoja, the state capital.

On Monday, Justice Umar Salisu of the Lokoja High Court ordered the sack of Mr Ahmed-Anaje in a case filed by Daudu Adeku-Ojiah, Hussain Yusuf and Abdulrahaam Suberu, who challenged his appointment by former governor Yahaya Bello.

The plaintiffs, represented by Lawal Rabana (SAN), had sued Governor Ahmed Ododo, the State Attorney General, Muzi Abdullahi and the Ohinoyi as the first, second and third defendants in the case, which began in Okene before its transfer to Lokoja.

The three plaintiffs had pleaded with the court to make a declaration that the procedure adopted in appointing the third Defendant to the throne of Ohinoyi of Ebiraland was wrongful and unlawful.

They also argued that the process was contrary to the Procedure of Ascension to the Throne of Ohinoyi of Ebira Land, Edict No 3 of 1997guiding the appointment of Ohinoyi of Ebiraland.

Mr Ododo and the attorney-general, in their appeal, which has Messrs Adeku-Ojiah, Yusuf and Suberu as the first, second and third respondents, challenged the decision of the lower court.

In the reliefs sought, the state government pleaded with the appellate court to allow the appeal and give an order setting aside the lower court’s decision.

They also prayed the court to dismiss the suit of the first to third respondents at the trial court for lacking merit.

They said the ruling in HCO/12c/2006, that is, Exhibit 1, relied upon by the first to third respondents, was an interlocutory ruling in respect of processing, nomination, selection and appointment of some set of persons at the time, as Ohis to the five districts of Okengwe/Okene, Eia, lhima, Adavi and Eganyi.

In their five grounds of appeal, they alleged that “the learned trial judge erred in law and reached a perverse decision when he placed heavy reliance on Exhibit P.O 4 annexed to an “Affidavit of Facts in Response to the First, Second and Third Defendants Notice of Preliminary Objection.”

“The learned trial court erred in law and reached a perverse decision to the detriment of the Appellants when it relied on an interlocutory decision in suit no:- HCO/12c/2006 between Dr Habibu Angulu Sani v the Kogi Govt and five others.”

They argued that the trial judge erred in law and the same occasioned a miscarriage of justice against the appellant when he assumed jurisdiction to hear and determine this instant suit when, in actuality, he lacked jurisdiction.

They also argued that the court’s judgment was against the weight of evidence presented at the trial.

The claimants, however, prayed the court to allow the appeal and dismissed the case of the respondents and the judgement of the lower court.

(NAN)