Abuja, Nigeria –The Court of Appeal urged warring factions in Kano’s emirship dispute to avoid provocations as tensions flare over leadership claims.
Judges stressed that all parties must preserve peace until the Supreme Court rules on Emir Muhammadu Sanusi II’s contested reinstatement.
Meanwhile, a three-member appellate panel led by Justice Biobele Georgewill approved withdrawing Kano State’s application.
This followed the case’s transfer to the Supreme Court, now handling the constitutional dispute.
By dismissing procedural filings, the court streamlined the legal process, curbing potential delays.
The move aims to prevent further clashes among supporters of rival emirs.
This procedural shift effectively paused lower court rulings on the emirship, halting further actions until final judgment.
The decision reinforces legal protocols requiring deference to higher courts during pending appeals.
Controversy erupted after Kano’s government reinstated Sanusi as the 16th Emir under a 2024 law, overturning predecessor Aminu Ado Bayero’s removal and dissolving four emirates created by ex-Governor Abdullahi Ganduje.
Critics argue the move destabilized longstanding structures, triggering rival claims to authority.
Meanwhile, courts have grappled with conflicting interpretations of state powers over traditional institutions.
On March 14, 2025, Justice Okon Abang suspended an earlier Appeal Court ruling that validated Sanusi’s return, ordering parties to preserve the “status quo ante bellum.”
This directive aimed to freeze changes made after a June 2024 trial court decision, but opponents labeled it constitutionally flawed.
Respondents stressed their Supreme Court appeal justified delaying lower court enforcement.
During recent hearings, Kano State’s lawyer Ibrahim Wangida confirmed procedural compliance, including transferring appeal records to the apex court.
Legal experts note such transfers automatically freeze prior rulings, a precedent the Appeal Court reinforced while urging caution.
Abdul Fagge, counsel for appellants, acknowledged respondents operated within constitutional bounds despite disagreements.
Critics, however, argue conflicting judicial orders risk eroding public trust, with some labeling recent maneuvers as procedural overreach.
The dispute’s complexity reflects deeper tensions between modern governance and traditional authority in northern Nigeria, where emirs wield significant cultural influence.
Kano’s case now tests legal frameworks balancing state power and hereditary leadership.
As both sides await the Supreme Court’s intervention, analysts warn prolonged uncertainty could fuel political instability.
Sanusi’s supporters view his reinstatement as correcting past injustices, while opponents decry it as partisan interference.
The outcome may redefine emirship selection processes, impacting similar disputes nationwide.
For now, the Appeal Court’s restraint order stands as a temporary shield against escalation.
Legal teams prepare final arguments, aware the Supreme Court’s verdict will set critical precedents.
Citizens watch closely, recognizing the stakes extend beyond royal titles to constitutional integrity and Nigeria’s evolving governance model.
The case highlights enduring struggles to harmonize tradition with contemporary law, underscoring the judiciary’s role as arbiter in culturally charged conflicts.
With Kano’s stability hanging in balance, the nation braces for a landmark ruling that could reshape its sociopolitical landscape.
