LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW – Traditional Evidence – Proof of Chieftaincy Claims
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The onus is on a plaintiff in a claim for chieftaincy declaration to prove that the claimant of the title was validly nominated and installed in accordance with the customary law or traditional history relating to the chieftaincy. Traditional evidence is admissible in proof of such claims, and witnesses may repeat the story which their ancestors had told them, as such evidence does not require eye-witness accounts.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Ogwuegbu, JSC, in Nteogwuile v. Otuo (2001) NLC-1631996(SC) at p. 14; Paras A–D.
"The onus is on a plaintiff in a claim for chieftaincy declaration to prove that the claimant of the title was validly nominated and installed in accordance with the customary law or traditional history relating to the chieftaincy. Traditional evidence is admissible in proof of such claims, and witnesses may repeat the story which their ancestors had told them, as such evidence does not require eye-witness accounts."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
In chieftaincy declaration claims, the plaintiff must prove valid nomination and installation according to customary law or traditional history. Traditional evidence is admissible. Witnesses may repeat stories told by ancestors—eye-witness accounts are not required. The evidence is hearsay but admissible as traditional history. The court must evaluate the consistency and probability of the tradition. The onus is on the plaintiff to prove the customary law and its application. The evidence must show the specific customs governing succession. The court may rely on proved customs from previous decisions or evidence. The principle recognises the nature of traditional evidence—oral transmission across generations.
