By Onikepo Braithwaite

FBN v GHL: Abuse of Court Process

In setting the 2025 agenda for the Nigerian Judiciary, topmost on the list for the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Kudirat Motonmori Olatokunbo Kekere-Ekun, GCON (CJN), should be the eradication of abuse of court process/indiscipline which has become a negative trend in our legal system.

Last week, we were inundated with the news that First Bank of Nigeria Plc (FBN) had obtained an ex-parte Federal High Court (FHC) Interim Order per Dipeolu J. dated 30/12/24, freezing the accounts of General Hydrocarbons Limited (GHL) and others to the tune of $225+ million, being the alleged indebtedness of GHL to FBN (Suit No.FHC/L/2378/2024). I must state that I am not aware of the actual facts of the case, having not had the opportunity to peruse any originating process or defence therein, and so, I am therefore, not in a position to comment on the merits of the case. But, with the letter of Dr A.I. Layonu, SAN, Counsel to GHL dated 9/1/25 written to the Banks, and the two court orders (one from each case) that have circulated so far, some facts glaringly point to a case of forum shopping/abuse of court process on the part of FBN.

Prior to the order of 30/12/24, GHL had filed Suit No. FHC/L/CS/1953/2024 at the FHC Lagos Division against FBN (from the suit number, it is clear that GHL’s case is first in time), in which a judgement per Allagoa J. dated 12/12/2024 was delivered, restraining FBN from inter alia, obstructing or preventing any loan facilities or funding for the exploration or operation of OML 20 and from taking steps to enforce any security, receivables etc against GHL, pending the hearing and determination of the ongoing arbitration proceedings between GHL and FBN. It is pertinent to note that, both GHL and FBN were heard and argued GHL’s application in Allagoa J’s court in this earlier matter filed by GHL, and being a party to this suit and very aware of this judgement, FBN still went ahead to file a fresh matter, using the same law firm that had handled the first GHL case, also at the FHC Lagos Division and obtain an ex-parte order that somehow reversed  Allagos’s earlier judgement. This is a flagrant abuse of court process, as it is trite that a court of coordinate jurisdiction, let alone the same court, that is, one court of the FHC cannot sit as an appeal court over the decision of another court of the FHC – see Sections 241-243 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended)(the Constitution).

In Ogboru & Anor v Uduaghan & Ors (2013) LPELR-20805(SC) per Clara Bata Ogunbiyi, JSC, the Supreme Court held that abuse of process was defined at Page 11 Black’s Law Dictionary 9th Edition as “The improper and tortuous use of a legitimately issued court process, to obtain a result that is either unlawful or beyond the process’s scope”. In the latter case of FBN v GHL, the result of purporting to freeze the accounts of GHL (Mareva Injunction) appears to be unlawful, bearing in mind the earlier judgement of Allagoa J., and FBN’s only available option of appeal following Allagoa J’s judgement. Also, in Okafor & Ors v AG Anambra & Ors (1991) LPELR-2414(SC) per Adolphus Godwin Karibi-Whyte, JSC, the Supreme Court held that “It is the law that multiplicity of actions on the same matter, may constitute an abuse of the process of the court. But, this is only where the action is between the same parties with respect to the same subject-matter”. Definitely GHL and FBN were parties in both cases, even though many more parties were added to the second case, to throw people off the scent that it is the same case and same subject-matter. From a perusal of FBN’s abusive motion ex-parte, it is crystal clear that the 4th – 6th prayers were more or less an appeal, but to the same FHC, not the Court of Appeal, asking for the reversal of Allagoa J’s judgement; and it follows that, if the ex-parte order in the FBN case reversed Allagoa J’s judgement, which, effectively it did, the subject-matter of both cases must be the same or closely related. 

The Supreme Court also held in First Bank v TSA Industries Ltd (2012) LPELR-9714(SC)  that “An abuse of process always involves some bias, malice, some deliberateness, some desires to misuse or pervert the system”. I submit that, from the foregoing, this is a fine example of abuse of process as it is undeniable that these elements – bias, malice, deliberateness, were present in FBN’s action of knowingly securing an ex-parte order, using the same law firm that represented it during the first GHL case, approaching another court of the same FHC Division during the court’s Christmas vacation instead of going on appeal, to obtain an order that reversed Allagoa J’s judgement, and somewhat sneakily too, since the order was obtained without GHL being put on notice. 

It is trite law that when a litigant is dissatisfied with the decision of a court, the only option open is to file an appeal to a higher court. In this circumstance, FBN had a right of appeal to the Court of Appeal  – see Sections 241-243 of the Constitution. Instead, what FBN did in the latter case filed at Dipeolu J’s court, was to undermine the authority of the FHC per Allagoa J. See APC & Ors v Karfi & Ors (2017) LPELR-47024(SC) per Ejembi Eko, JSC where the Supreme Court held inter alia that, the right of appeal is a constitutional right and “self-help has no place in a democratic society that savours the rule of law”. I submit that FBN resorted to self-help, and this doesn’t augur well for one of the oldest banking institutions in Nigeria. 

It could very well be that Dipeolu J. may not have been aware that the first case was already before his brother Judge, and had been decided in Allagoa J’s court – this much was stated in GHL’s Counsel’s 9/1/25 letter. But, nevertheless, it is still a classic case of forum shopping/abuse of court process on the part of FBN and its Counsel, if not the Judge, in which case it would require the Legal Practitioners’ Disciplinary Committee (LPDC)’s attention or the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee (LPPC) with regard to the discipline of FBN’s Counsel who are Senior Advocates of Nigeria. In fact, apart from GHL, Dipeolu J. could also report FBN’s Counsel to the LPPC for their misconduct. To restore the integrity of the Judiciary/legal profession erring members, be it Counsel or Judicial Officers must be disciplined. Without this, misbehaviour will continue with gusto and aplomb.

Additionally, if Dipeolu J. was unaware of the existence of the previous case, the next item on the Judiciary’s 2025 agenda, should be the establishment of a central pool for each court, for example, all the FHC Divisions, so that once a case is assigned to a Judge he/she is able to enter the names of the parties into the system to ascertain if the matter is already before another court of the FHC. This is just a start though, as we see forum shopping cut across different Judicial Divisions such as the FHC and various State High Courts, as in the Rivers State House of Assembly matters, and that of the Kano State Emirate issue. In fact, maybe the central pool can be like a google search engine, utilised by all Judges of Superior Courts of Record for instance, whether Federal or State, to gather such basic information about litigants and cases that may have already been filed. A common complaint of Judges, is that they were misled or unaware that cases were already before other courts. However, this complaint may not hold water for cases that are already public knowledge, or one where everything concerning the case occurred in Enugu, but Counsel has come to file in Kaduna and the Kaduna Judge hears the matter.

John Yakubu Yusuf’s Conviction

Last week, one of our Columnists sent me a forward that made the rounds on social media, stating that one Yakubu Yusuf who had been convicted of embezzlement of N22.9 billion, would only forfeit property worth N325 million and pay a N250,000 option of fine in lieu of 2 years imprisonment. This incorrect version of the case that made the rounds on social media is a half truth, which is as usual, designed to malign the Judiciary, while the correct version of the facts of the case which I have summarised here, are readily available on the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) website, for those who are interested in the verification of information before dissemination! 

John Yakubu Yusuf was actually an Assistant Director at the Police Pension Office, who was prosecuted by the EFCC for the theft of N32.8 billion alongside five of his colleagues. He was initially convicted by Abubakar Talba J. of the FHC Abuja Division, and  sentenced to two years imprisonment with an option of a N750,000 fine. The EFCC being dissatisfied with the decision, however, appealed to the Court of Appeal, which subsequently, in a unanimous decision, sentenced Yusuf to six years imprisonment and ordered him to repay N22.9 billion, having pleaded guilty to three of the counts and admitting to converting about N24 billion. The Supreme Court per Tijjani Abubakar, JSC affirmed the Court of Appeal’s judgement. 

The caption which accompanied that incomplete social media story that was popularised is, “Nigeria, we hail thee….What a Judiciary, what a Country”. How can a Judiciary of over 1,300 judicial officers be adjudged on Talba J’s one perverse decision? Even in this Yusuf case, 9 judicial officers partook in it – Talba J, 3 Court of Appeal Justices and 5 Supreme Court Justices. Should the other 8 Justices who corrected the FHC judgement,  be tarred with the brush of Talba J’s questionable/perverse judgement, let alone the whole Judiciary? My argument has always been that, we must learn to situate our criticisms in the exact spot where they belong. While I do agree that we have had some perverse decisions similar to that of Talba J’s, we have many more sound decisions in comparison. 

I certainly believe in freedom of expression guaranteed by Sections 39(1) (& 22) of the  Constitution, but I can never subscribe to the mischievous dissemination of reckless speech/half truths/outright falsehood, aimed at disparaging individuals and institutions, causing disaffection and heating up the polity. This is of no benefit whatsoever; on the contrary, it is destructive, because the more such incorrect narratives are spread, the harder it is for people to believe the truth. 

More Items for the Nigerian Judiciary’s 2025 Agenda

Just like Dr Willy Mutunga, the former Chief Justice of Kenya (2011-2016) was able to implement his ‘Judiciary Transformation Framework’ which successfully changed the face of justice in Kenya, the CJN must also publish her own agenda and design the  steps she will take to achieve her goals like Dr Mutunga did; because like Kenya then, we also have similar goals to achieve in our justice system – transparent and good recruitment/appointment system for judicial officers based on merit; elimination of corruption; reduction of delays; better access to justice for citizens; fostering professionalism, competency and efficiency; entrenching discipline, training of judicial officers and staff, and leveraging on technology.

It is important for there to be assessment of Judges, not just on the number of judgements they write, absenteeism, what time they sit etc, but, actual tests of their knowledge, because part of the complaint about the Judiciary today is that, some of the judicial officers are incompetent, and because some may have been selected as a result of nepotism and other reasons not remotely connected to their ability, such people must be weeded out of the Judiciary soonest, seeing as an incompetent Judge is just as dangerous as a corrupt one. There must also be regular training of Judges in the  interpretation of the Constitution, the Electoral Act 2022 (since the High Court Judges double as Members of Election Petition Tribunals) and judicial procedure. 

It is also time to address the remuneration of Magistrates, and their conditions of service. Qualified Lawyers earning less than N200,000 per month?  This is disgraceful. It is as if the Magistracy which is actually the first point of contact of majority of the Nigerians with the Judiciary, hasn’t just been ignored, but totally forgotten. Urgent reforms are required here.

Could it also be the time for the Supreme Court of Nigeria to have a proper Communications Department, like that of the UK that has a Press Office complete with a Head of Communications and Communications Manager? The integrity of the Nigerian Judiciary is at stake, and needs to be addressed. Furthermore, as a result of the abuse of freedom of expression, the world in which we are living in today has changed, so much so that, if people do not come out to defend themselves, whatever is circulated, whether true or false, will simply be taken as true.

Conclusion 

The GHL/FBN case appears to be a golden opportunity for the Judiciary and the legal profession as a whole, to start 2025 by coming together to implement what should be topmost on the Reformatory Agenda, that is, zero tolerance for abuse of court process, corruption and nonsense. This is the only way in which the belief in the Nigerian Judiciary as the last hope of the common man, can be restored. We have spoken and written extensively on what needs to be done; there’s no better time than the beginning of a new year like this, for action to commence. It is important for there to be synergy between the National Judicial Council and the LPDC/LPPC, for this clean up exercise to be effective and successful. 

[email protected]

By Suyi Ayodele

Does Ifa, the spiritual divination system in Yoruba religion, know everything? Is there anything hidden from Baba Àgbonnìrègún? Why, for instance, is one of Ifa’s cognomens He who sees the outer and the inner man, who deciphers a man’s inner thoughts (Arínú róde, olùmòràn okàn)? Can the (the short man of Igbeti hill (Okùnrin kúkúrú Òkè Ìgbètì) forget to tell his clients all that is to know? Before I state why I raised the above posers, let me quickly attempt an answer from a personal experience.

This story is a true-life account from a narrator-as-a-participant point of view. My late father unravelled the riddle for me in the presence of his half brother and childhood friend. In my place, when a child says this is what I heard from my father, nobody doubts him! Here is the story.

I have a childhood friend from the neighbouring town. We used to go to his place to play occasionally. His mother was a beautiful old woman. At least, one could say that in her younger days, the mama must have been a damsel. The old woman had a practice. Each time we came around her house, she would single me out, chant my family praise names, and at our departure, wrap some dry fish and ask me to give it to my mother to cook for my father.

On each occasion I delivered the message to my mother, I would ask if the mama was one of our relations. The usual answer from my mother was: “I am not a member of your father’s family; how would I know all your relations?” I allowed it to pass until one day, when we visited our friend, and his mother acted differently.

On seeing me, she asked me to sit on her lap and she began to chant my family praise names. She became emotional and mentioned some cognomens that are esoteric and reserved for only inner members of the family. My head swelled. Then she praised my father to the high heavens and told me how good he was as a man. While leaving her house, she gave me virtually all the ingredients that would make a good pot of soup and added six big dry fish to be delivered to my mother.

Getting home, I delivered the message and asked my mother the usual question about our relationship with the old woman. I refused to accept the usual answer from her and I told her the praise names the mama mentioned while chanting our family praises. Then I told my mother: “Maami, you cannot tell me that you don’t know who this mama is.” My mother noticed that I was serious and that I would not be swayed by her default response of not being my father’s family member. Then she said: “It is ok. When a child wants to know who his relatives are, he asks his father”, pointing towards my father’s room to go and ask him.

I went to Baba and told him what happened. All the time the mama used to give me fish for my mother, I used to tell my father too and his response would be if i thanked the mama enough. So, when I relayed that last encounter, and asked who the mama was to her to know those esoteric praise names, and her good account of my father’s personality, my father said that he would tell me what I wanted to know. but first, he asked me to go and call his half brother and his childhood friend.

When the two old men arrived, my father told me the story behind the old woman. For 17 years, my father said that the mama was married to him. But for those almost two decades, there was no child between them. They did all they could, nothing happened. Then, one day, the husband and wife decided to go and consult the oracle again. My father said that he had two Babalawos in mind: his elder brother, Baba Falade, and the second, his father-in-law, Baba Fagbewesa, the then Alamoeku (chief diviner) of Ikoyi Ekiti. The two were the best of their era.

First, they headed to Baba Fagbewesa’s house. My father said that on getting to the old diviner, he was busy on the divination mat. As soon as the husband and wife stepped in, Baba Fagbewesa was said to have stopped the Odu Ifa narration for the consulting client, looked at the couple, thanked Ifa and said: “Ifá ni Ifá hí tò” (a divination follows another). Without casting his Òpèlè, Baba Fagbewesa said that the Odu he was narrating was also applicable to my father and his wife. Ifá, the diviner announced, said that the woman was gifted only one male child in her lifetime. Not only that, but Ifá also said that the only male child would be fathered by someone who knows how to add two to three (eni tó mo bí ase lè mú eéjì kún eéta). In essence, only a diviner, or someone knowledgeable would be able to put the woman in the family way. Baba Fagbewesa dismissed them and continued with his divination.

Leaving Baba Fagbewesa’s house, my father said that he and his wife rode on his bicycle and headed for his elder brother, Baba Falade’s house, to ask for confirmation. The same scenario occurred in Baba Falade’s place, who was also on a divination course for a client. My father said that as soon as he entered with his then wife, Baba Falade stopped in his tracks, praised his Ifa to high heavens and told them this: “Òrò riín gbe’bo, é gbo’gìgùn (Your case requires no sacrifice, needs no charm). Omo kan soso gíro l’Èdùmàrè jogún hun oyà re (It is only one child that the Creator bequeathed to your wife). Honi káa s’uba omo hun, á mo dídá, á mo kíkó (And he who will father that child must know how to cast and how to pack that which he cast).”

The couple left for home and at home, my father said that he called the two people whom he asked me to call to witness the narration, which transpired. They took counsel and agreed that the mama would be released to fulfil motherhood somewhere else. Initially, the woman resisted. But one day, an itinerant diviner spotted her and asked her for a date. She responded that she was married. The lover-man said that Ifá told him that she would be his wife. Mama came back home to tell my father what happened. My father said that he reminded her of what Ifá said previously and asked if she wanted to die childless.

To remove any shame of promiscuity, the two agreed to divorce. Months later, mama moved in with the itinerant diviner. She did not miss that month when the foetus of joy kicked in her womb. That produced my friend, the only child the mama had all her life! So, each time the mama saw me, she used to remember the kindness of my father in releasing her to find fulfilment in life. My father said that he could not have done otherwise because Ifa confirmed that only an esoteric could make the mama a real woman. Now I ask again: Is there anything hidden from Baba Àgbonnìrègún, Ifá?

Why this poser and the ones at the introductory paragraph? Last Friday, January 10, 2025, Oyo State Government announced Prince Akeem Owoade as the new Aláàfin of Oyo-elect. The state government said that its announcement was final. Hours after the announcement, an audio went viral. In the audio, the Àwíse Àgbáyé (Chief diviner worldwide), Professor Wande Abimbola, spoke about the circumstances surrounding the selection of Prince Owoade as Aláàfin-designate.

The former Vice-Chancellor, Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU), Ile-Ife, said that following the near impasse that characterised the selection of another Ikú Bàbá Yèyé for Oyo, he was contacted by Governor Seyi Makinde to use Ifá divination to select a new Aláàfin. He added that he travelled down from his US base to Oyo, and spent 10 days on the divination mat, asking Ifá about all the eligible princes. Ifá, he added, picked Owoade and the report, 21 pages, was put together by the Òyìbó wife of the Àwíse and sent to the governor.

My curiosity arose when Baba Abimbola said that almost a year after submitting the report, Governor Makinde called again to ask for another Ifá divination to select two alternatives to the first choice by Ifá. The renowned Babalawo said that that could probably be to avoid a situation where, after investigation on the character of the initial choice, there were found some blemishes on his personality! I was alarmed that Àwíse Àgbáyé could express that line of argument after Ifá had made a choice among many princes presented for divination!

Like Baba Abimbola said, nobody has ever questioned his integrity in all the positions he has held in academics and politics. The hallmark of a Babalawo is truthfulness. Asking the Àwíse Àgbáyé to consult Ifá on the all-important matter of Aláàfin is the right choice. But I am worried that when Governor Makinde asked for a second divination, he did not lecture the governor that Ifá kìí paró (Ifá does not lie), Òpèlè kìí s’èké (Òpèlè does not play tricks), and insisted that there would be no second divination.

I am shocked that Baba did not insist that Ifá is Elérìí Ìpín (the one who witnesses destiny), and as such, knows the destiny of Owoade right from his conception, and that Ifá would not in any way make the mistake of choosing a picaro as the Aláàfin! I am not a Babalawo, but I know that Baba Abimbola knows that no matter what anyone might have done in the secret, Ifá has the capacity to reveal it as contained in the common refrain by Babalawos that “ìtànsán oòrùn yí ó fi ó hán (the breaking of the sun will reveal you)!

My second problem with the selection process is the fact that it was the governor, and not the Òyómèsì (Oyo kingmakers), who consulted the Àwíse Àgbáyé for divination. In that audio, the Àwíse asked all Yoruba to stick to the culture of the race. One of the cultures of the race pertaining to the selection of an oba is that the kingmakers are the ones who do the selection through the guidance of Ifá.

Oluwasegun Oladosu and Ajayi Adetokunbo Olaiya, in the paper: “Kingship and Integrity in Yoruba Traditional Society” (Nigerian Journal of Christian Studies / Vol. 4 No. 2 (2021), page 173), affirm this position when they posit that: “While the choice of the king could rotate among the ruling houses, some towns or cities do not have that privilege. Rather than praying and fasting over who becomes the next Oba, these communities go spiritual by invoking the Ifá to tell them the candidates for the Kingship. Those communities still believe it is better to keep it real by consulting Orunmila to protect the tradition of the land. In the ancient town of Oyo, choosing the Aláàfin requires its unique process of enquiring from Òrúnmìlà likewise in Ile-Ife. This enables the Òyómèsì, the kingmakers, to make ‘the right choice’….”

The question begging for answer here is: who were the Òyómèsì present when Àwíse Àgbáyé made the divination for Governor Makinde? Did they include the five living Òyómèsì, or were those accused of taking bribes from one of the candidates excluded and the number made up by the government-appointed Òyómèsì? Would Ifá tolerate this?

Since the passing of Aláàfin Lamidi Adeyemi III on April 22, 2022, this would be my third piece on the ancient throne of Oyo. In the two previous articles: “Aláàfin: Message to Òyómèsì, Makinde”, published on April 26, 2022, and “Aláàfin Stool: Putting culture to the sword?”, published on September 26, 2023, I expressed the fear that once the Yoruba race got the selection of Aláàfin wrong, there would be nothing left for the race.

The happening in Oyo is disturbing. Nobody doubts the power of the state governors to appoint, suspend and depose obas in the race. Our Yoruba governors are now Ifá priests who select Oba for the race. That position I canvassed in the piece: “Yoruba Governors are Ifá Priests”, published on June 20, 2023. The danger of the new civilisation is that very soon, an average Yoruba child may not know what is sacrilegious and what is the normal thing. The Timi of Ede, Oba Munirudeen Adesola Lawal, demonstrated that sacrilege when he was spotted in a recent viral video on his knees in homage to the Emir of Ilorin, Alhaji Sulu Gambari!

The Oyo State Government has confirmed the choice of Prince Akeem Owoade as Aláàfin-by giving him his staff of office by Governor Makinde and Oba Owoade entered Oyo town on Monday in grand style! All Oyo sons and daughter, nay, the entire Yorubaland, have no option than to accept the situation as it is now and hope that whatever might have happened, at the fullness of time, Ifá himself will allow the breaking of the sun to reveal all. We wish the Aláafin, Oba Owoade, a prosperous reign on the throne of his forebears. KABIYESI O!

By Lasisi Olagunju

The Oba under our law is not a king; he is a chief. That is why the law governing the appointment and removal of the oba and his ijoye is called Chiefs Law. The colonial government made it so. The oba was not recognised as king by the law – because the English king/queen was the sovereign here, and there could not be more than one king in a kingdom.

It is also significant that what the oba occupied or vacated was a ‘stool’, not a ‘throne’. Only the English king or queen had a throne. And, one more thing: the oba was allowed to raise revenue but he must not call what he did “collection of taxes”; only His/Her Majesty, the King/Queen of England had that right. The revenue-raising privilege the oba had was known and called “imposition of tributes.”

Sixty four years after the British left, the law is still Chiefs Law; what the oba occupies is still the lowly ‘stool’, not a ‘throne’. Imposition of tributes or collection of taxes? The oba lost that power to the local government council. Igbi Aiye Nyi. No condition is permanent.

‘Igbi Aiye Nyi’ is a Yoruba novel that teaches the impermanence of power and privileges. Authored by T. A. A. Ladele, the title literally means ‘The Tide of Life Ebbs’ – or, in simple words, the cliche: “no condition is permanent”. In chilling details, we read the story of unbridled excesses and a humbling fall. From the mountain top of privileges, we read the Alaafin of Oyo, his palace and his chiefs descending the stairs to abject subjection. It is a book for every new king to read in their period of seclusion. I particularly recommend it to the three high chiefs of Oyo who are currently talking tough against their employers (the government) over the choice of their new oba.

In a contest between egg and stone, the result is easily predictable. No king should think himself God – or government; and no chief must act like king. The past is in the past. There is no kingmaker anywhere today apart from the governor. And this is not just about Oyo State. A new Owa Obokun of Ijesaland was chosen last month. Whose call was that? You have also seen the making of the Emir of Kano by one governor and his unmaking by another. The real chiefly kingmakers lost their scepter the day the British came and took power. The oba was very powerful and divine in the past. But that part is buried in the past.

I once reported this: In the West Africa magazine of March 3, 1945 was a piece in celebration of the memory of Alaafin Siyanbola Ladigbolu I (1911 – 1944) who joined his ancestors a few months earlier. “The highest oath that an Oyo man could take was to swear by the head of the Alaafin,” the magazine wrote, and added that the people believed their oba was God. The oba himself thought himself so and he said so and acted so. How?

Eshugbayi Eleko was deposed as the Oba of Lagos in 1925 by the British. He was subsequently banished to Oyo town but he didn’t go quietly into the night; he went to court. During the ensuing celebrated case, evidence on some historical issues was needed in support of the deposed oba. It was to the Alaafin of Oyo that counsel to Oba Eshugbayi went.

Oba Ladigbolu was asked to swear an oath before his evidence was taken.

Alaafin queried in anger:

“By whose name?”

“By God’s name or by the name of your idol,” the lawyer told him.

“I myself am God!” The oba thundered.

That was hubris; he was too big to know that the horse of his powers had bolted. If you doubt the reality of how the Alaafin perceived himself in the statement above, maybe you should read another case recorded for him in history. It is the account of a visit of Ibadan Councillors I. B. Akinyele and J. Aboderin to Alaafin Ladigbolu on a peace mission on 1 October, 1934. It tells of what an Alaafin thought he was – and capable of doing.

The councillors left Ibadan and reached Oyo at 4:00 p.m. They reported themselves to the Resident. With the Resident, they went to the Aafin in company of the District Officer, Mr. Jones. They then delivered the message of the Baale of Ibadan and of his council to the Alaafin: “In the olden time, our forefathers and your fathers were friends, and we earnestly wish that this friendship should continue. Your messengers have been treating our messengers with contempt and abusive language whenever we sent them to give you compliments and presents during the time you hold your yearly festivals. We do not like this sort of treatment any longer. If our friendship is to continue, our messengers should be treated with courtesy befitting our dignity. We do not presume that you are responsible for this kind of treatments that our messengers receive from yours. We would like you to take step to warn these messengers to stop this bad habit. We wish that we should maintain the old bond of friendship and live as neighbours in peace and harmony. Wishing you long life and prosperity.

When we have delivered the above message, the Resident called upon the Alaafin to reply. The Alaafin then said that this message was not meant for him, and the Resident himself should reply to it. The Resident again reiterated the message, and explained it to the Alaafin. The Alaafin again said that the message was not meant for him. The Resident gave the gist of the message two times more and asked the Alaafin to give his reply to the message.

Then the Alaafin said: “Of all the inhabitants of Ibadan, with the exception of Oluyole, which of you has got a father? And, are you not all my slaves I used to send out on expedition to fight my enemies?”

The Resident said that the Alaafin should not say that again, because in the Treaty of 1893 between Ibadan and Queen Victoria, his predecessor (the late Alaafin) admitted that the Ibadans are free.

The Alaafin replied:

“He! He! (Fie, Fie) I think all white men are the same. Captain Ross, my friend, had put them under me, and if you wish to take them away, you could please yourself I know there is no else beside me but God. What shall I do with the Ibadan people? They do not work for me in the farm; they have not helped to construct roads in Oyo. What do they do for me? If any man wanted promotion at Ibadan I used to send my friend, Captain Ross, to elevate him; and if any appeared recalcitrant, I used to send my friend to punish him and remove.

When I instructed Situ the Bale to promote one of my friends, and he did not listen, I worked his removal through my friend. I think you white men are the same and I think you adopt my friend’s policy, and if you do not wish to do so, you could please yourself, this means ‘Omi titun de, ejatitun de’ (New water comes and new fishes come) Ten Kings ten times. You Resident are the new water and you are the new fish. It is your own look out, to manage the business as you like.”

The Alaafin said further:

“You, the two councillors, I want to give you a special message to Okunola who calls himself a Baale. Tell him he should remember that in his father’s family, no one has ever borne a title in Ibadan which is higher than AYINGUN. When he came to beg me here that I should give him a title, I asked my friend, Captain Ross, to go and promote him to the title of Ekerin, although he had not been a Mogaji before. When he wanted to become the ASHIPA, I again sent my friend to tell Situ, the Baale of Ibadan, that if he refused to make him the ASHIPA I would demote him and make the Ekerin Baale in his stead. When he wanted to be made the Balogun, it was the turn of Aminu, the son of Apanpa, to be the Balogun, but I took the turn from Aminu and gave him and promoted him to become the Balogun. When he wanted to become the Baale of Ibadan, I deprived Otun Ayodele who had the right to the post and made him the Baale of Ibadan. Whenever he quarreled with any of his wives, I used to settle the quarrel. If he could follow this Oyinbo (the new Resident) let him hold on to him. He should remember that when he had no horse, I gave him one. If that was the way he could show his gratitude, alright. He should remember that Situ had not done half of what he had done and he should remember how I hated him.”

The Alaafin then gave the councilors one turkey and one pound and sent them away.
The account above is as it is carefully set out on pages 933 and 944 of ToyinFalola’s ‘Ibadan: Foundation, Growth and Change, 1830-1960.’

The Alaafin who said all the above was the same Alaafin who died and was denied the customary company of courtiers on his journey back to his ancestors. You remember Wole Soyinka’s ‘Death and The King’s Horseman’? The historical incident that birthed that play happened at the exit of Oba Ladigbolu. His predecessors enjoyed the privilege of the company of their Olokunesin, the king’s horseman who must commit suicide and follow his late lord to the world of the dead. The white man said no to Ladigbolu’s Olokunesin; the king who said he was God went home alone, and lonely.

We hope the new Alaafin knows that he is appointed king and not God. We hope he learns from the ebbing tide that washed away his ancestors’ privileges. I hope he knows he is not coming in to become rich, become a pastor or an Imam. His coming is to retie the snapped rope of life of his land.

The people saw other trees in the forest before they settled on this omo trunk for making the newest Gbedu drum. The choice must always remember that fact and beat the right beat, sing the right song. When a prince is crowned king, he must never be seen again making good-luck charms – except he wants to become Olodumare. The one who did that was presumed seeking to be God. He should ask his predecessors for guidance.

Fifty years is a good age to enter the ancestral grove. When a child is invested with the Egungun costume, he has become an elder and must, therefore, be found with elderly conduct. Courage lives with leaders. A key wisdom the new king will hear in Ipebi is that one does not become an elder and yet lack courage. Cowardice has consequences. He should ask Alaafin Ajaka.

The Alaafin institution is bigger than Oyo town. Whoever sits on its stool should never be seen at weedy, seedy joints. He must speak the language of his beginning and clothe his ancestors with velvets of respect and respectability. Strange words that attack the reason for his stool should not be his to say. We have seen enough wrong persons ‘shitting’ on ancestral beds. There was an Alaafin Abiodun Adegoolu in whose reign the people sang songs of praise. Abiodun’s successor was Aole whose reign made refugees of the people. The choice of who to copy is for the new moon to make.

The sum of the Oyo Mesi has never been equal to the throne of Oranyan. We hope that the kingmakers know that the last time their word was law was the day before the white man took over. Today, ‘kingmakers’ make kings only with the approval of the governor and the government. Half a word should not be inadequate for the wise.