It was gathered that the Ojuromi of Uromi, Anselm Eidonojie II, has filed a suit before a Benin High Court against the Edo State Governor, Adams Oshiomhole, and the state executive council over his recent suspension as the traditional ruler of Uromi.
Other respondents in the suit are the state Commissioner of Police, Assistant Inspector-General of Police (Zone 5), the Inspector-General of Police, the Nigeria Police Force, one Betty Okoebor and one Matthew Okoebor.
The executive council had in a letter dated November 4, 2016, and signed by the Secretary to the State Government, Prof. Julius Ihonvbere, suspended the traditional for allegedly assaulting one Betty Okoebor during the September 28 governorship election in Esan North-East Local Government Area.
It also stripped him of all the privileges and rights of the Ojuromi of Uromi, in line with Section 28(1) of the Traditional Rulers and Chiefs Law (1979), adding that his remuneration from the five per cent monthly allocation to the local government “shall be appropriated and donated to orphanages” during the period.
However, the traditional ruler, through his counsel, Benjamin Iruobe, urged the court to declare that the action of the governor (second respondent) amounted to recklessness and abuse of office, was unconstitutional, unlawful, actionable and without a just cause.
The plaintiff, in the suit instituted in pursuance to Order Two and Four of the Fundamental Rights Procedure Rules, 2009, under the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015, among others, requested an order of the court for the enforcement of his fundamental rights under the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, in terms of the relief sought in the statement in support of his application.
The suspended monarch also prayed the court to order the sum of one billion naira as compensation for damages against the respondents jointly and severally and as a reparation for the alleged assault, torture, arrest, detention and harassment against him in the course of their alleged unlawful acts.
He further urged the court for an injunction restraining the defendants by themselves, agents, servants and or privies or such other persons from oppressing him or imposing any inhibition or restrictions on his freedom of movement or his agents and family, in respect of the complaint.
The plaintiff also sought an order directing the respondents to tender a public apology to him in respect of the complaint.