Soun Has Power To Suspend Chiefs, Oyo Commissioner Displays Ignorance Of Law – Group

The Vanguard for the Defence of the Rule of Law has faulted the Oyo State Government’s position on the reported suspension of Dr Saka Adegbite Balogun as the Balogun of Ogbomosoland, insisting that the Soun of Ogbomoso, Oba Ghandi Afolabi Olaoye, has powers under customary law and statute to discipline chiefs under his authority.

The group described a statement credited to the Commissioner for Local Government and Chieftaincy Matters, Ademola Ojo Ijaya, as misleading, arguing that it failed to recognise the traditional ruler’s authority over chieftaincy matters within his domain.

OYOINSIGHT.com had reported that the commissioner dismissed the purported removal of Balogun by the Soun was contrary to the Oyo State Chiefs Law, maintaining that the recognised chieftaincy title holder could not be removed by the monarch without the governor’s authority.

But in a rejoinder, the group argued that the Soun’s authority to install chiefs under his traditional jurisdiction also carried the power to discipline them, including suspension where necessary.

“Under Yoruba customary law, a paramount ruler is the consenting and approving authority for chieftaincies within his domain. He who has the power to install necessarily has the power to discipline, including suspension, where a chief is found wanting,” the statement said.

The group further argued that the Chiefs Law of Oyo State recognised the authority of a prescribed authority to exercise disciplinary control over chiefs under its jurisdiction.

It maintained that suspension was a recognised traditional and administrative measure that could be applied pending the final determination of an alleged infraction.

The group also questioned the assumption that a chieftaincy title placed its holder beyond disciplinary action, insisting that loyalty to the throne and respect for traditional authority remained important obligations.

Taking a swipe at the commissioner, the group said his statement demonstrated what it described as a lack of understanding of customary law and the legal framework governing traditional institutions.

It advised Ojo to seek further legal guidance before making pronouncements on matters concerning chieftaincy law and traditional authority.

To support its position, the group cited the Supreme Court decision in Olakunrin & Ors. v. Ogunoye & Ors. (1985) 1 NWLR (Pt. 4) 652, claiming that the ruling upheld the powers of the Olowo of Owo to depose chiefs under his authority.

The group said it considered the judgment relevant to the dispute involving the Soun and Balogun, although the precise application of the precedent to the present circumstances would depend on the applicable law and facts.

It also disputed the suggestion that Governor Seyi Makinde personally appointed Saka Balogun, arguing that the appointment was made by the Soun and subsequently approved by the governor.

According to the group, the distinction between the power to appoint and the power to approve was central to understanding the dispute. It argued that the governor’s approval of an appointment did not, by itself, settle the question of the traditional ruler’s disciplinary powers.

The group urged members of the public to disregard the commissioner’s position and continue to respect the Soun, saying the monarch’s action was intended to maintain peace, order and development in Ogbomosoland.

“The action of Kabiyesi remains lawful, legitimate and in the best interest of tradition,” the statement said.

The rejoinder sets out a sharply different legal interpretation from that advanced by the Oyo State Government over the status of Saka Balogun and the extent of the Soun’s authority in chieftaincy matters.