Proliferated Troubles

Achike Udenwa, former governor of Anambra Imo State

The creation of autonomous communities seems to have created more problems in Imo State, than it is intended to solve
By Eugenia Okpara, Owerri
The creation of autonomous communities during the immediate past administration of Chief Achike Udenwa, has set otherwise brothers at each others’ jugular over Ezeship tussle. The tussle for the traditional stools of the new autonomous communities often leads to bloodbath, as well as destruction of properties like what happened in Lagwa Okwuato autonomous community in 2005.
Due to the persistent tussle for the throne in various communities, there are now more Ezes-elect than the autonomous communities. In the same vein, there are so many Ezeship matters in courts across the state. If the aim of the proliferation of autonomous communities was to engender harmonious relationship among the kith and kins of each community, it failed woefully, analysts say. This is because the development has brought about dangerous dichotomy that is threatening the security of the various communities.
Irked by the escalating rate of Ezeship tussles in the State, Governor Ikedi Ohakim on Monday, May 25, 2009 while handing over staff of office and certificate of recognition to traditional rulers, warned that government would no longer tolerate people parading themselves as Ezes-elect. He further warned that government will not recognise any traditional ruler who has a suit pending in the court.
One of the numerous Ezeship suits which litter various courts in the State is suit HOU/ 14/2004 pending in the High Court, Mgbidi. The matter is between Eze (Dr) P.A.C Agwaramgbo, who sued the Attorney General of Imo State over the recognition of Eze Aloysuis Obi as the traditional ruler of Mgbidi autonomous community. Agwaramgbo parades himself as the Ogbuehi Odu V of Mgbidi and so pleads with the court to declare him as the traditional ruler of Mgbidi.
But an Mgbidi High Court presided over by Honourable Justice K. A. Orjiako has been told that the plaintiff, Eze (Dr.) Pius Anozie Chukwujindu Agwaramgbo, is not a recognised traditional ruler as he claimed. In the course of cross-examining the first plaintiff, PWI, the defence counsel, Benjamin C. Iheka, informed the court that the first plaintiff (PWI) withdrew a suit HOR/32/2003 which he filed in 2003 at an Orlu High Court presided over by Honourable Justice B. A Njemanze, when he was challenged that he is not a recognised traditional ruler.
When Iheka put it to the PW1 that the suit was withdrawn when he could not prove that he is a recognised traditional ruler, he affirmed it, but added a proviso that he was recognised by Mgbidi people. Also, when he was reminded that the matter was withdrawn with his consent, he did not deny it. but rather said he was not challenged by anybody.
Agwaramgbo: “I was not challenged by anybody, rather it was the comment of the presiding judge who wanted to know if I had been recognised for me to institute a matter as Eze (Dr.) P A C Agwaramgbo”.
However, when he was asked on Monday, April 27, 2009, if he was a recognised traditional ruler, he affirmed but denied conceding that he was not a recognised traditional ruler when he was challenged at the Orlu High Court on November 5, 2003.
Tendering a certified true copy of the order of the Orlu High Court in suit HOR/32/2003, the plaintiff’s counsel raised an objection that compelled the defence counsel to make an oral application for amendment. The plaintiff, counsel, Ofodile Obiesie, had pointed out that the suit number in the document tendered and the one on the statement of defence were not same and so cannot be accepted as it amounts to confusing the court. The respondents had in their amended statement of defence quoted the suit number as HOU/32/2003, instead of HOR/32/2003.
The oral application read in part: “The document is founded on technical error which can be a hindrance to substantial justice. It is also based on the mistake made in writing letter U instead of letter R in the number of the suit in paragraph 25 of the amended statement of defence of second and third respondents. It is a clerical error which can be amended with the leave of the court at any stage of the matter. We seek the leave of the court to amend the said error by substituting letter U, with letter R to read HOR/32/2003. This application is necessary because a litigant cannot be made to suffer for the mistake of the counsel. We seek the leave of the court to grant the application and accept the document as exhibit”.
Objecting to the oral application, however, Ofodile said that granting the application will do a great harm to the plaintiff. The presiding Judge, Honourable Justice K.A Orjiako, struck out the objection and the ruling of the Orlu High Court was admitted as exhibit.
Ruling in the suit HOR/32/2003, the judge, Honourable Justice B A Njemanze, had said that considering the issue which has arisen in court concerning the question of the recognition of the plaintiff as a traditional ruler, it is his view that it is a proper case for the court to exercise its discretion to allow the plaintiff to withdraw his case.
The ruling read in part: “I have listened to Oguaji-Dike, the learned counsel for the plaintiff, and I am of the opinion that considering the issue which has arisen here in court concerning the question of the recognition of the plaintiff as a traditional ruler, I am of the opinion that this is a proper case for the court to exercise its discretion to grant leave to the plaintiff to withdraw the suit. In the circumstance, leave is hereby granted to the plaintiff to withdraw this suit. Consequently, this suit is hereby struck out”.
The defence counsel, M.C.N. Nwizulams, state counsel, had told the court that the plaintiff is not a recognised traditional ruler and that he not only parades himself as one. It was based on this development that Oguaji-Dike applied to withdraw the suit with the consent of the plaintiff, after confirming that the plaintiff had not been recognised as a traditional ruler by Imo State Government as provided by law.
The first plaintiff had in his statement of claim told the court that he is the Eze Ogbuehi Odu V of Mgbidi, and therefore sought a declaration of the court that he, Eze (Dr.) Pius Anozie Chukwujindu Agwaramgbo is the traditional ruler of Mgbidi.
He also sought a declaration of the court perpetually restraining the second defendant, Eze Aloysius Obi, the traditional ruler of Mgbidi autonomous community, from addressing himself or being addressed or parading himself as Eze Udo 1 of Mgbidi.
However, the defendants comprising the Attorney-General, Imo State, the traditional ruler of Mgbidi; Eze Aloysius Obi and the President-General of Mgbidi, Sir. Benson Aleme in their statements of defence said that the plaintiffs applied for the creation of Isi-Mgbidi autonomous community in respect of which the first plaintiff and one J. C.Onyenekwe were presented as Ezes-elect.