It is ultra vires for AIG Garba to bar usage of the word ‘customary tenant’ - Atie, Esq

Warri-based Legal Practitioner and social commentator, Fabius Jemide Atie, Esq., say it is ultra vires for the Assistant Inspector-General, AIG of Police Zone 5 Headquarters, Salman Dogo Garba, to bar usage of the word ‘customary tenant’.

Barr. Atie, spoke in response to media reports credited to AIG Salman Dogo Garba, wherein the AIG purportedly barred the Ijaws, Urhobos and Itsekiris from referring to each other as ‘customary tenants’, during a stakeholders’ meeting recently held in Benin City, Edo State.

He asserted: “My attention has been drawn to the news making rounds that the Assistant Inspector General of Police Zone 5 Headquarters has bar the Ijaws, Urhobos and Itsekiris from referring to each other as ‘customary tenants’.

“Whatever his reasons may be, the question is whether he is in a position to make such order.

“While I conceded that he has the right to say whatever he chose to say. It is another kettle of fish for the order to be obeyed as many reasons stares the Inspector-General of Police Zone 5 Headquarters A.I G. Salman Dogo Garba in the face which I intend to show.

“Firstly, the Assistant Inspector-General of Police Zone 5 Headquarters is not a lawmaker that has made law to that effect. He cannot assume the power of a legislator as he is strictly in the business of executing the law so made by the National Assembly, state house of assembly and orders made by court.

“His order of baring such usage is an affront on the decisions of erudite judges of the various courts, particularly the Supreme Court of Nigeria that has decided cases to that effect that there are ‘customary tenants’.

“With due respect, the Assistant Inspector-General of Police Zone 5 Headquarters does not have the powers to bar the usage of the word ‘customary tenant’. It is ultra vires his powers to do so. He cannot make his office a court and sit as an appellate court against the decisions reached by the Supreme court and all other various courts that have used the phrase.

“Secondly, why will the Assistant Inspector-General of Police, Zone 5 Headquarters limit his bar to people of Ijaw, Urhobo and Itsekiri speaking people of Delta State?

“Why did he not generalize the bar to all parts of Delta State, if really he is serious of not making it to favour a particular group or groups of people? Is it only in Warri North, South and Warri South-West that we have people that have issues involving ownership of land that have been adjudged ‘customary tenants’? The answer is a big NO.

“The third reason is that in other parts of Delta State, people have been declared ‘customary tenants’? More so, there have been many judgments on lands in the whole parts of Nigeria particularly in the western parts of Nigeria where the Inspector-General of Police is from.

“If such usage can go on in the west un-hindered, then this bar is selective justice which with due respect can never be enforced.

“The fourth reason is that there is no offence known to law that a user of such phrase can be charged with. There is no definition of the usage of the phrase ‘customary tenant’ as an offence in any written law. That is the principle of law in the case of AOKO V FAGBEMI (1961) ANLR 400.

“It is an elementary principle of law that you cannot put something on nothing and expect it to stay. It will surely fall. That is the position of the court in the case of UAC V. MCFOY 3 ALL E.L R. 1169.

“From what I gathered from the news, the pronouncement of the bar is aimed at preventing a breakdown of law and order in Warri North, Warri South and Warri South-West, which are the three areas where the phrase were used.  The question is whether the bar of the use of the word ‘customary tenant’ is the only way breakdown of law and order can best be prevented? In the alternative, is there no other means where a breaker of the law can be sanctioned?

“With due respect to the Assistant Inspector-General of Police, it is not the only way a breakdown of the law can be prevented. Instead, the bar will create injustice to those who have the benefit of such judgment wherein it was used. In the situation where people do not want to accept that they are ‘customary tenants’ when the courts have already pronounce them to be so, such persons are the ones fanning the ember of crises not the person in whose favour such judgment was pronounced. If one has headache, he does not chose to cut off the head just to cure the headache. Instead, he finds workable solutions to cure the ailment not destructible ones.

“Section 4 of the Police Act 2020 states that the functions of the police which include the prevention of crime and investigation of the same. It is also to ensure that the law of the land cum judgments are obeyed. Any one that disobeys the judgment of the court can be prosecuted in a competent court and judgment delivered by the court. That approach is of universal application and best practices all over the world.

“Nigeria model of arms of government is tailored after the British pattern of governance with the legislature, executive and judiciary and their distinct functions. One is not meant to perform the function of the other. The Assistant Inspector General of Police should limit himself to the functions of the executive and not that of the legislature and/or the judiciary. The police under the command of the Inspector General of Police knows what to do if it is really desirous of preventing a breakdown of law and order. The police ought to look at those who are not ready to accept their adjudged status as ‘customary tenants’ and advise them to accept it instead of looking for a means for them to change such status. If their refusal leads to a breakdown of law and order, then they should be prosecuted instead of finding a soft ground for them to land. A bird cannot be a butterfly and vice versa.

“The hard truth is either a butterfly or a bird. That is the bitter pill that must be swallowed.”

×