Legal fireworks reigned Wednesday afternoon before Justice Musa Usman of Adamawa State High Court IV as plaintiff witnesses testified in the case challenging the creation of the Fufore Emirate.
The suit was filed earlier this year, a few months after the Fufore Emirate was carved out of the famous Adamawa Emirate, when three prominent sons of the Adamawa Emirate went to court, asking that the new emirate should not have been created.
The progress of the case was delayed severally, but at the level of hearing on Wednesday, it was lots of legal fireworks as plaintiff witnesses gave evidence and defense lawyers sought to punch holes on the evidences.
The case pits three senior titleholders of the Adamawa Emirate: Musa Halilu Ahmed (Dujima Adamawa), Alhaji Mustapha Dahiru Mustapha (Yeriman Adamawa), and Alhaji Mustapha Ahmad (Sarkin Noma Adamawa) against Governor Ahamdu Fintiri; Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Afraimu K. Jingi; and the Emir of Fufore, Muhammad Sani Ribadu.
During the latest proceedings in Yola, four key witnesses for the plaintiffs including renowned historian Professor Alkasum Abba, were cross-examined by defence counsels: Chief Lenon Zedon and Afraimu Jingi.
The proceedings were characterized by fiery brickbats, as lawyers argued over the historical legitimacy of Fufore creation.
After the cross-examinations, counsel to the plaintiffs, Manga Nurudden (SAN), announced the closure of the plaintiffs’ case; and Justice Musa Usman then adjourned the matter to November 3rd and 4th, 2025 for the defence to open its case.
Speaking to journalists outside the courtroom, Manga Nurudden explained the next stage of the case: “We have called our four witnesses and concluded our evidence today. The court has adjourned to the 4th and 5th of November for the defence that is, for the government and the new emir to bring their own witnesses who will be examined and cross-examined. After that, the court will adjourn for final addresses from both sides.”
In his reaction, Afraimu Jingi, the Adamawa State Attorney General and third defendant in the case, said it was now up to the court to determine the credibility of the plaintiffs’ evidence.
