The notoriety of the Nigerian judicial system for delayed justice is likely unrivalled. Seeking justice through the Nigerian court is mostly a tortuous, testing and tiring experience. Often, the journey is chequered by endless delays, manifesting in the form of frequent long adjournments, case re-assignment and multiple fresh starts when presiding judges retire, recuse themselves or are elevated. This and more is exactly the story of the Longe family of Ibadan, Oyo State, who have been locked in a long-drawn-out legal battle with their “alleged” family lawyer — who is now dead — over the property left behind by their late patriarch, Jonathan Longe.
The lawsuit, marked 1/101/2011, which began 14 years ago, parades some of the celebrated names in Nigerian judicial circles.
Famous human rights lawyer, Bamidele Aturu, was the original claimants’ lawyer. Samuel Ige — a younger brother of the late renowned ex-Attorney General of the Federation, Chief Bola Ige (SAN) — is the first defendant; while retired Supreme Court Justice Kayode Eso was joined as the fourth defendant.
While the over-decade-old lawsuit remains mired in endless delays, these active players in the lawsuit have passed on.
The main defendant, Samuel Ige, died in May 2012 (a year after the case began); Justice Eso died six months later on November 16, 2012; while Aturu passed on in 2014.
Agonisingly, however, long after these original actors have departed the world, the case, now in its 14th year, continues to drag without any end in sight.
The next hearing has been slated for February 4, 2025, before Justice K.B. Olawoyin of the Oyo State High Court in Ibadan, who is the fourth judge to handle the case since it was filed in 2011.
Justice Olawoyin inherited the case late last year and it started afresh before him for the fifth time.
Between 2011 and now, two of the four judges who have handled the case have retired, while the last one before Justice Olawoyin recused himself from the matter, after a year of stagnation.
The late Aturu’s place has been taken by one of his protégés, Mrs. Omolade Yusuf; the late Justice Eso’s daughter, Helen, is now standing in her father’s place; while Ige’s son, Leye, represents his father.
The dispute
At the centre of this extraordinary legal battle, marked 1/101/2011, is a property known as No. 9 Olagbegi Avenue, Bodija Estate, Ibadan. Originally a block of four flats, formerly designated as Plots 44, 45 and 46 Bodija Estate, Ibadan, it has now metamorphosed into a school.
The claimants are Olatokunbo Longe and Afolabi Longe — children of the property’s original owner — who sued on behalf of themselves and the Longe family.
Listed as defendants are Chief Samuel Ige (now deceased); Oyo State Housing Corporation; Oyo State Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice; and retired Justice Kayode Eso, now represented by Helen Aina.
In the lawsuit, the Longes explained that their father, Jonathan Longe, died on July 4, 1972.
They claimed that during Longe’s lifetime, he engaged Samuel Ige as his solicitor. Before Longe died, he prepared his Will and appointed his first son, Foluso A.B. Longe, and Gabriel B. Fatile as executors and trustees of his estate.
The Longes said until their father’s death in 1972, he paid yearly rent on the property, because it was on mortgage from Western Region Housing Corporation, Ibadan.
They said in their father’s Will, he listed sources of funds to be used to redeem the mortgage, including a 10-acre land at Isheri in Lagos, which he directed to be sold.
The Longes claimed that upon their father’s death, the family retained Ige as solicitor and Ige continued to manage the property on their behalf, collecting rent.
They stated that all went well until the trustees listed in the Will died. Fatile died on July 18, 1982, while Foluso Longe died six years later, on January 5, 1988.
With the death of the two trustees, they claimed the lawyer related with the matriarch of the family, Chief Mrs. A.O. Longe. However, she too died in December 2002.
Longe’s children alleged that following the deaths of the two original trustees and the matriarch, Ige “forged a Deed of Assignment dated 10th October 2003, bearing the signatures of the two executors, who died in 1982 and 1988.”
They alleged that “with the forged Deed of Assignment purportedly signed by the two executors, who died over 15 years earlier, the 1st defendant transferred the ownership of the property to himself and re-registered it as 20/20/3423.”
They further alleged that “The property worth over N300m was sold with the forged Deed of Assignment to Hon. Justice Kayode Eso (CON) in another Deed of Assignment dated 10/04/2005 and registered as number 39/39/3459 at the Registry of Deed, Ibadan.”
Furthermore, they alleged that “Chief Oladele Ige refused to give an account of the rents he collected on the said property since 1972, including £80,000, which he claimed was in a bank account.”
The Longes petition police
According to legal documents analysed by our correspondents, the tussle started off with a petition written by Longe’s children in 2009 to the Inspector General of Police against Ige, whom they described as their family solicitor.
The petition was titled, “A Case of Forgery, Stealing and Fraudulent Conversion of Proceeds of Sale of Property Worth N300m”.
The complainant was Olatokunbo Longe, the fifth child of the late Longe.
Listed as suspects were (1) Samuel Oladele Ige (Prime Suspect) and (2) Hon. Justice Kayode Eso (He bought the property).
The police investigated the complaint and released “A Police Interim Investigation Report” dated January 15, 2010, which was signed by the Commissioner of Police, Special Investigation Unit, Force Headquarters, Abuja, CP Ali Amodu.
In the Interim Investigation Report addressed to the Inspector General of Police, Amodu wrote: “It is apparent from the investigation so far conducted that the document on the Bodija property could have been forged soon after the death of the legitimate executors of the late Longe’s Will and that of the late Mrs Longe, the stepmother of the complainant.
“The current investigation is trying to unravel the mystery surrounding the claim of the prime suspect, Chief Ige, that the executors of the Will, who died between 1982 and 1988, could have authenticated the documents of the property for him in 2003 — 15 clear years after the death of the last executor.”
Amodu also raised concern about Justice Eso’s alleged refusal to write a statement when approached by the police.
The CP stated: “Another pertinent issue worth mentioning to the IGP is the refusal of Hon. Justice Kayode Eso (CON) to make a statement to the police. The retired Supreme Court judge was the person who bought the controversial property in 2005. He admitted orally but declined to make a written statement on the issue. He will, however, be reminded of the legal implication of his action, that the police may obtain a warrant for his arrest if his current attitude persists.”
Amodu concluded by saying: “A detailed report will be submitted to the IGP on the conclusion of the police investigation on the matter, sir.”
The Longes demand Final Investigation Report
In March 2010, three months after the police released the Preliminary Investigation Report, the Longes, through their counsel, Emmanuel A. Adenle & Co, wrote to the IG, demanding “Final Police Investigation Report.”
In the demand letter, dated March 1, 2010, the family lawyer raised concern about Justice Eso’s alleged refusal to make a statement to the police.
He wrote: “After going through the interim (investigation) report and listening to the rumour making the rounds in Ibadan, we are a bit disturbed for the following reasons:
“That Justice Kayode Eso (retd.), who purportedly bought the property in issue without adequate investigations, ‘declined to make a written statement on the issue’ to the IG’s team.
“We make bold to say that Hon. Justice Kayode Eso is not above the law.
“The fact that a police officer from the IG’s office went to his house to obtain a statement from him appeared to be a misplaced honour, which he has abused. We believe that he should be ordered to report to the IG’s office to make his statement that can vindicate him, if any.
“This is a criminal matter with uncontroverted documentary evidence and there is no reason why anyone should be intimidated.
“Our clients are becoming restive and are warming up to take this case to the ‘Peoples Parliament’. We are doing our best to douse the tension because our confidence in the upper echelon of the police is solid and unshakable.”
The lawsuit
Eventually, in 2011, the Longes engaged renowned human rights lawyer, Aturu, to take over the case. On their behalf, Aturu’s chamber filed the civil lawsuit, marked 1/101/2011, before the Oyo State High Court in Ibadan.
Among other prayers, the Longes sought “A declaration that the purported assignment of the property known as No. 9 Olagbegi Avenue, Bodija Estate, Ibadan, by the 1st defendant (Ige) to Hon. Justice Kayode Eso (retd.) vide the Deed of Assignment dated 1st April 2005 and registered as No. 39 at Page 39, Volume 3457 at the Lands Registry Ibadan is invalid, null and void and of no effect whatsoever, being an assignment made by a person without title and authority to transfer title.”
They prayed for “An order quashing the consent granted by the Oyo State Commissioner for Lands and Survey to the purported assignment of the property known as No. 9 Olagbegi Avenue, Bodija Estate, Ibadan, to Hon. Justice Kayode Eso (retd.) by the 1st defendant, dated 31st March 2005.”
Furthermore, the Longes urged the court to mandate Ige to deliver to them all the title documents of the disputed property, “which were put in the care and custody of the 1st defendant by the plaintiffs’ father as his solicitor.”
They also urged the court to mandate Ige to pay them N100m in general damages.
Oladele Ige’s defence
Following the death of Chief Oladele Ige in 2012, he was replaced by his son, Leye Ige, by an “order of court made on the 28th day of January 2013.”
In his 52-paragraph amended Statement of Defence dated January 9, 2014, Leye staunchly denied the claim that his father fraudulently converted the disputed property to his own.
He noted that though the claimants, in 2009, wrote a “malicious petition” to the police against his father, and his father was invited by the police and interviewed, “he was never charged or even arrested over any alleged fraudulent acts in respect of the property till the time of his death three years later.”
Leye also denied that his father worked for the late Jonathan Longe as a solicitor.
He claimed that the late original executors sold the property to his father when they could not pay the mortgage debt that had piled up on the property.
Leye said, “At the time, Nigersol Construction Company Limited, which had become the mortgagee and was itself under liquidation, had sought to exercise its power of sale in respect of the (Longe’s) property.
“As the sole liquidator of Nigersol Construction Company Limited, my late father was responsible for recovering delinquent loans and directing the sale of secured assets, including the property in dispute.
“My late father was approached by the initial executors to purchase the property, so that part of the purchase price would be used to settle the mortgage debt. They explained that this would produce better value than a fire sale at a public auction.
“My late father purchased the property in dispute and it was validly transferred to him by Mr Foluso A. B. Longe and Mr Gabriel B. Fatile, the initial executors of the late Jonathan Longe’s Will.”
Leye said the transfer “was evidenced by a Deed of Assignment.”
He, however, claimed the Deed of Assignment was “left undated and unregistered at the time of execution, in order to avoid incurring excessive stamp duty charges and to facilitate a quiet re-sale to the Longe family, should the necessary funds to re-purchase the property become available.”
Leye insisted that notwithstanding that the Deed of Assignment was later dated October 10, 2003 —15 years after the executors’ death — the property was “validly transferred to my late father by the initial executors during their lifetime.”
He also claimed the Deed of Assignment was signed in the presence of bona fide witnesses but said “all reasonable efforts made to trace the witnesses have proven abortive.”
Leye described the Longes’ suit against his late father as a “vexatious” action “based on misinformation and injurious falsehood, thereby, constituting an abuse of court processes.”
He, therefore, urged the court to “dismiss the claims of the claimants.”
Justice Eso’s defence
In defence of the late Justice Eso, his son, Olumide Eso, an architect, deposed to a 43-paragraph Witness Statement on Oath dated April 11, 2022.
Olumide said by virtue of his relationship with his late father “I am thoroughly familiar with the facts of this case.”
He revealed that his father bought the disputed property from the late Chief Oladele Ige at the price of N16m, paid in three tranches of N6.5m on August 7, 2003; N1.5m on August 27, 2003; and N8m on October 13, 2003.
He said in addition to three payment receipts and a Deed of Assignment, his father also obtained “a sworn statement of indemnity from Chief Oladele Ige, indemnifying my father from any loss or hindrance he might suffer if it subsequently turned out that there was a contrary claim to the property.”
Olumide admitted that the Deed of Assignment presented by Ige to his father was unregistered, prompting Justice Eso’s estate agent, Mrs Laide Akinseye-George, to visit the property and interviewed tenants.
According to Olumide, the tenants confirmed Ige as their landlord.
Additionally, Akinseye-George visited the Oyo State Housing Corporation in Bodija, where the corporation, according to Olumide, verified that Ige was the legal owner of the property.
Olumide said, “At this stage, my father insisted that unless the property was registered, he was not prepared to purchase it. Chief Samuel Oladele Ige accepted this condition and went ahead to register the property with the Oyo State Housing Corporation and the Oyo State Ministry of Housing, Lands and Survey.”
Olumide said on taking possession of the property, Justice Eso found that the existing structure was dilapidated, so, he demolished it and built a modern two-storey apartment complex.
According to Olumide, the construction of the new building took four years, from January 2004 to 2007, yet the claimant did not show up until 2009 to make claims of ownership.
“Throughout the four-year period of heavy and noisy construction work on the property, involving the delivery of building materials by trailers and other heavy trucks, no one appeared in order to challenge my father’s title or authority to take possession of the property, demolish the existing building and erect a brand new modern complex on the site.
“The site of the building being constructed was not fenced until 26 October 2006 and the ongoing heavy works were open for passers-by to view for over three years.”
Olumide said when the claimants showed up in 2009, his father expressed his astonishment that “anyone claiming title to the property could have remained quiet for so long in spite of the heavy construction work that took place on the property for over four years.”
“Our claim is that the claimants are clearly guilty of laches and acquiescence and they have clearly slept on their right insofar as the rights of the 4th defendant to the property is concerned.”
Olumide contended that if the claimants succeed in their ownership claim, the could would not order the return of the property to them but only order Ige to pay them for the value in addition to damages.
Alternatively, he said should the Longes succeed and seek to retrieve the property, they will have to pay the Eso family N350m “being the current value of the building complex and the land constituting the property.”
Olumide said, “Equity aids only the vigilant. Equity prohibits unjust enrichment and will not permit a situation where the claimants looked on as my father innocently and for value poured resources into the property without a squeak of protest from the claimants.”
Olumide urged the court to dismiss the claimants’ suit and award heavy costs against them.
However, 14 years on, the court has not been able to determine where the pendulum will swing.
Judicial delays, re-assignments, fresh starts
A letter, dated January 26, 2016, written by Aturu’s chamber to the Chief Judge of Oyo State, revealed the long delays that the case has suffered and captured the frustrations of the Longes over the lawsuit.
In the letter titled “Application of Urgent Re-assignment,” Mrs Omolade Yusuf of Aturu’s chambers chronicled the tortuous trajectory of the suit in the labyrinth of the court.
According to Yusuf’s narration, the suit, when filed in 2011, was assigned to Justice Munta Abimbola, “before whom most of the proceedings were heard at the pre-trial stage.”
Yusuf said the suit ran into first delays “when Justice Abimbola was sent on a national assignment to sit at an election tribunal.”
“While Justice Abimbola was away on assignment, the case inadvertently suffered a delay of about one year before the judge resumed,” the claimants’ lawyer stated.
Eventually, Justice Abimbola returned from the election tribunal but the hope that the case would resume immediately was dashed as “Justice Abimbola was immediately elevated to the position of the Chief Judge of the High Court, Oyo State and as a result, the said matter had to be transferred to Justice Oladehinde and as such suffered further delay.”
“Whilst the case was pending before Justice Oladehinde for over one year, the matter was never heard, even though it was slated for trial to begin.
“At the last adjourned date, which was January 21, 2016, the said case was to come up for commencement of trial but upon getting there, we were informed that Justice Oladehinde had retired and that the matter would subsequently be reassigned to another court,” Yusuf lamented.
Relating the frustration of her clients, the lawyer stated: “It is very crucial to state that the claimants (our client) have suffered extreme and untold hardships due to the severe delay occasioned in this matter, which has now spanned five years without trial having commenced. Any further delay would deny the claimants their right to justice and erode their belief in our justice system as ‘Justice delayed is justice denied’.”
Yusuf appealed to the Chief Judge that the lawsuit be “urgently re-assigned to another court for continuation of proceedings, so as to ensure that our clients’ rights are protected.”
But despite Yusuf’s passionate plea for an expeditious hearing in 2016, nine years after, the case remains delayed.
On June 11, 2024 — eight years after — Yusuf had to write another letter of lamentation, chronicling new layers of delays and setbacks that have bogged the case down.
The second letter addressed to the Chief Judge of Oyo State prayed for yet another re-assignment and a fresh start, 13 years after the case first began.
Her letter was titled: “Request for an immediate and speedy reassignment.”
The letter revealed that following the retirement of Justice Oladehinde in 2016, the case returned to Justice Abimbola, who first heard it.
Before Justice Abimbola, where the case started afresh for the third time, five years after it was filed, it crawled for another six years but thankfully, the case eventually made it to the final stages.
After calling their witnesses and tendering documents over a six-year period, the parties, on November 23, 2022, adopted their final written addresses and Justice Abimbola then adjourned for judgment.
But alas, before the slated judgment day, Justice Abimbola retired “and the file had to be yet again sent back to the registry for reassignment,” Yusuf lamented.
“Our clients (the claimants herein) were quite devastated at the news as their hopes of getting justice were becoming dimmer by the day given the number of years the case had been ongoing for,” the lawyer groaned.
Another fresh start
With Justice Abimbola’s retirement in 2022, the case was then re-assigned to Justice M. O. Ishola, to start afresh yet again —for the fourth time!
The entire six years spent on hearing the case before Justice Abimbola and all the resources spent in lawyers’ fees and witnesses’ mobilisation had gone to waste.
Though Justice Abimbola retired in 2022, it took another whole year before the suit was re-assigned to Justice Ishola in February 2023.
In Justice Ishola’s court, the case stagnated for over a year until finally on May 7, 2024, Justice Ishola announced he would be recusing himself from hearing the matter “for personal reasons”.
Justice Ishola announced that he would return the case file to the Chief Judge to re-assign to another judge to start afresh — for the fifth time!
Enters Justice Olawoyin
With Justice Ishola’s recusal, the case was reassigned to Justice K.B. Olawoyin.
Findings by The TheNigerian, showed that the case had come up three times before Justice Olawoyin on October 4, 2024, November 7, 2024, and December 11, 2024.
At the last hearing date, Justice Olawoyin further adjourned till February 4, 2025.
“Hopefully, Justice Olawoyin will hear the case,” Yusuf said with resignation.
In her June 11, 2024 letter to the Chief Judge, seeking another re-assignment of the case after Justice Ishola recused himself, Yusuf laid bare the untold frustration she and her clients had faced over a 14-year period seeking justice that keeps taking the appearance of a mirage.
She lamented: “From the facts stated above, it is quite evident that this case has suffered several setbacks, and a direct consequence of those setbacks is that the claimants keep wasting their very scarce resources, the counsel’s valuable time and efforts are equally wasted and, perhaps, most important of all is that the claimants are up to date still unable to access the justice that they deserve.”
She pointed out that her principal, Aturu, who started the case in 2011, had died.
“My Lord, this case was filed in 2011 by the late Bamidele Aturu of very blessed memory. He actively fought for justice to be done before his untimely death in July 2014.
“This case is a documentary case that ought to have been determined in a few months as opposed to the almost 14 years it has been (and still counting) in court.
“The claimants have suffered untold hardship and severe emotional trauma as they are beginning to believe that justice in this case is becoming increasingly delayed and now fear it may not be obtained in their lifetime.
“Their late father toiled for them (his children) to have better opportunities in life, only for his deathbed wishes to be snatched by the very person he entrusted them to.
“We, therefore, hope and very strongly believe that the above-described matter will be reassigned to another court without further ado for proceedings to continue, to revive the last thread of hope in our clients, the claimants herein,” Yusuf stated.
It remains to be seen whether this case will make it to a conclusion and whether this extraordinary legal battle will ever come to an end.
Additional report: Onozure Dania
