Date: 2013-04-26

The Appeal Court, Ilorin Division has reversed the decision of a state High Court, Omu-Aran, Kwara State on the controversies surrounding the use of the suffix title,, “Oro” to the names of nine generic towns in the state.

According to the decision of the appellate court, the title belongs to all the nine generic towns in what is known as Oro Kingdom and none of the nine towns has the right to lay claim to the sole ownership of the title. The affected generic towns located in Irepodun local government area of the stat include: Afin-Oro, Agbeola-Oro, Irebode-Oro, Iddo-Oro, Iludun-Oro, Oke Ola-Oro, Ijomu-Oro, Otun Oro and Okerimi-Oro.

The state High Court, Omu-Aran Judicial Division, had earlier affirmed Otun-Oro, one of the nine towns has the legal right to retain ‘Oro’ as its name. but not satisfied with the decision, the Oloro of Oro, Oba Abdulrafiu Olaniyan Oyelaran I, had along with the Attorney-General of the state appealed the verdict. They asked the appellate court to direct that Otun-Oro should vacate its claim to ownership of the name ‘Oro’ as a generic name.

The appellate court, In the lead judgment delivered by Justice Obande Ogbuinya, held that the judgment delivered by Justice M. Abdulgafar of the Kwara State High Court, Omu-Aran on March 24, 2010 in which the claims of the respondent were granted, were fraught with perversion. The upper court held further that going by the exhibit presented to the court, the government reversed ‘Oro’ to Otun-Oro being its former name in the interest of public peace, order, morality and for the purpose of safeguarding the right and freedom of the other eight generic towns in Oro Kingdom.

The court said: “From this crucial and undebunked evidence, I draw the inescapable inference that the parties are tied to the same custom and tradition inclusive of the custom as to the usage of the name ‘Oro’ as suffix, not solely. It is, therefore, my view that what the government did was to return the respondent to its original name of Otun-Oro in accordance with the historical facts and antecedents and in overall interest of sustainable peace, progress and harmony in the nine generic towns in Oro Kingdom”, Justice Ogbuinya stated.

The court also held that in aggregate it could cannot see a way clearly to vilify or crucify the Kwara State Government for returning the respondents to their traditional name (Otun-Oro) as it pointed out that when the lower court tried the case, it reached its finding by ignoring evidence and also caused miscarriage of justice to the appellants in the sense that a holistic consideration of the case, inclusive of the evidence, clearly indicate that a result more favourable to the appellant would have been reached but for the errors they complained of.

It said further: “The lower court reached a finding which is at variance with mine and I brand it as faulty, waiting to be dispensed with. On the whole, having regard to reasons adduced above, with the aid of the law, I hold that the appeal is meritorious. It is allowed”.

The respondents, Chief Simeon Olayioye, Chief Emilius Alasiri, Mr. Bode Oyeyiola and Dr. Michael Ibiwoye had approached the lower court to revert the government Legal Note No. 2 of September 11, 2008 in Gazette No. 7 Vol. 42, wherein it decided that each of the nine communities comprising Oro Kingdom should have ‘Oro’ as a suffix to its name and that Otun-Oro, like each and every generic town shall not solely lay claim to ownership of the name ‘Oro’.

According to them,the government did not give them fair hearing before making the Gazette and that the Gazette was an imposition of name on them which infringes on their rights as guaranteed in Sections 40 and 41(1) of the Constitution as amended, which the court granted.