LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CHIEFTAINCY LAW — Registered Declarations — Court’s Role — Supervisory Not Legislative
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The court cannot assume the functions of the Chieftaincy Committee as regards the making of declarations of customary law governing the selection and appointment of traditional chiefs. However, where a declaration is challenged and set aside, the court may properly direct that a proper inquiry be set in motion as the basis for a new declaration.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Uwais, JSC, in Adigun v. Governor of Osun State (1995) NLC-1681992(SC) at pp. 17–18, 38–40; Paras. E–A, B–D.
"The court cannot assume the functions of the Chieftaincy Committee as regards the making of declarations of customary law governing the selection and appointment of traditional chiefs. However, where a declaration is challenged and set aside, the court may properly direct that a proper inquiry be set in motion as the basis for a new declaration."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Courts review chieftaincy declarations for legality, but do not make them. The power to make declarations belongs to the executive. If a declaration is invalid, the court may direct a new inquiry. The principle respects the separation of powers. The court cannot substitute its own view of customary law. The rule applies to chieftaincy matters. The court will set aside invalid declarations. The executive must comply with the court’s directions. The principle ensures that courts do not usurp executive functions.