Ado-Ekiti — A High Court sitting in Ado-Ekiti, Ekiti State, has validated the state government's decision to revert to the 1957 Declaration on the Osi-Ekiti monarchy, which restored the rights of the Arubiojo and Onifishin ruling houses to the stool.
In his ruling yesterday on an application filed by the Akombo and Alawe ruling houses seeking to quash the decision of the state government to restore the rights of the Arubiojo and Onifishin ruling houses to the Olosi of Osi-Ekiti stool, Justice Adekunle Adeleye resolved all the six issues in the case against the applicants.
The applicants in the case, which had been on for five years, were Princes Emmanuel Farotimi, Williams Ojo and Adewole Adeyeri for themselves and on behalf of the Akombo and Alawe ruling houses.
The respondents were the state's Commissioner for Local Government, Community Development and Chieftaincy Affairs; the Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice; Prince (Bishop) Peter Ademakinwa and Prince Adebayo Ajayi, for themselves and on behalf of the Arubiojo ruling house of Osi-Ekiti and Prince Femi Robinson, for himself and on behalf of the Onifishin ruling house.
The judgment validated the new declaration made by the Ekiti State government in October 2015 restoring the rights of the Arubiojo and Onifishin ruling houses to the Osi-Ekiti stool in accordance with the 1957 Declaration that recognised the four ruling houses of Arubiojo, Onifishin, Akombo and Alawe.
The court held that there was no wrongful action on the part of the Ekiti State government, saying the action of restoring the rights of the Arubiojo and Onifishin ruling houses did not injure the applicants.
Reacting to the judgment, the counsel to the applicants, Dr Oluropo Filani, said he was awaiting further directives from his clients to know the next step he would be taking on the case.
The Ekiti State Director of Public Prosecution (DPP), Barrister Ajibare, who appeared for the 1st to 3rd respondents, and Barrister Adetunji Oso and Barrister Stephen Alabi, who represented the 4th to 6th respondents, lauded the judgment.