By Adeola Badru

Following the judgement of High Court sitting in Ibadan, delivered by Justice Justice S.L Akintola, banning the  declaration of curfew for the annual celebration of Oro festival in Iseyin Local Government Area of Oyo State, counsels to the traditional worshippers have said no court judgement has prohibited imposition of curfew during its festival, contrary to the position of League of Imam and Alfas in the local government.

This was contained in a statement in Ibadan jointly signed yesterday and made available to Vanguard by counsels to the respondents following the judgement in a case instituted by Alfa Yusuf Muhyideen for himself and on behalf of League of Imams and Alfas, Iseyin against late Aseyin of Iseyin, Oba AbdulGaniy Salaudeen and sixteen Oro worshippers.

The counsels are Chief Matthew Adeoye, Mr. Adewale Adegoke, Mr. Taiwo Aworinde and Mr Olatunji Adeoti.

The statement noted that the submission by the League of Imam and Alfas that the consent judgement abrogated curfew during Oro festival in Iseyin is clearly reading into the judgement what is not there and could be tantamount to belittling the ruling of the court.

“Our attention has been drawn to the report circulating on social and mainstream media, of a news conference organised by the League of Imams and Alfas in Iseyin Local Government area of Oyo State on Thursday, 11th August, 2022, during which it was reported that the organisers of the event, which was allegedly held in Ibadan, Oyo State, said something to the effect that the judgement of court in Suit No. HSY/MISC. 6/ 2019 had prohibited the imposition of curfew during Oro Festival in Iseyin, Oyo State.”

“The regrettable aspect of the news conference organised by the League of Imams and Alfas is that the Applicants’ counsel in the two cases referred to above, Mr A. A. Olowonjaye, who should know the import of the judgement and the extent to which his clients could use it, was himself also at the conference and encouraged the propaganda that certain Oro rites had been abolished by the judgement.”

“The insinuation at the conference by the League of Imams and Alfas, and their counsel, Mr Olowonjaye, that it had “become illegal for Oro worshippers to declare curfew for their festival as such would negate the ruling of the court” is grossly misconceived and not borne out of the judgement as they could only speak for the applicant and those he represented in the suit and not anybody else.”

“The crux of the news conference to the effect that the consent judgement earlier mentioned has abrogated curfew during Oro festival in Iseyin is clearly reading into the judgement what is not there, and will constitute a wilful derogation from it.”

The counsels explained that while it was a fact that the imposition of curfew by Oro faithful is a prominent feature of the festival, only the applicant, and, by extension, the League of Imams and Alfas whom he represented in court, could claim protection under the judgement and not the generality of the people in the town.

“While it is conceded that the imposition of curfew by Oro faithful is a prominent feature of the festival, only the applicant, and, by extension, the League of Imams and Alfas whom he represented in court, could claim protection under the judgement and not anybody else.”

The statement noted that it is necessary to make this rejoinder in order to put things in proper perspective and douse the tension generated by the report that curfew has been abolished during Oro festival in Iseyin.
“We consider it necessary to make this rejoinder in order to put things in proper perspective and douse the tension which the report has generated in Iseyin and its environ.”

The counsels noted that after about three years of contentious litigation, parties were advised to settle amicably and they all embraced the advice in good faith and dialogue, which led to the judgement on June 30 that neither the applicant nor the respondents shall disturb, harass, intimidate, attack or do any act calculated to disturb, harass, intimidate or attack either party in the exercise of their religious beliefs.

“The dialogue led to the filing of a Terms of Settlement dated 29th June, 2022 and filed same date, but adopted by the respective counsel and made judgement of the court in the suit on the 30th June, 2022.”

The statement emphasized that among the deducible from the judgement is that it is not a win-all situation for either of the parties in the suit as the consent judgement imposed rights and obligations on both parties.

“That the applicant represented only the League of Imams and Alfas in Iseyin and no other place, and the judgement is therefore binding on parties to it only; and that the judgement prohibits both parties from infringing or curtailing the religious rights of each other.”