A recent judgment by the Plateau State High Court declaring that a Hausa woman born and raised in Jos North Local Government Area is entitled to an indigene certificate has sparked widespread reactions across Plateau State, with many indigenous groups condemning the ruling and the Plateau Initiative for Development and Advancement of the Natives (PIDAN) vowing to challenge it in court.
The judgment, delivered on June 9, 2026, by Justice C. Donglong, held that Fatima Baba Akawu, a Hausa woman born in Jos North cannot be denied a Certificate of Indigene.
The court further declared the practice of issuing "Residential Certificates" instead of Certificates of Indigene to certain citizens unconstitutional, unlawful, discriminatory, and unknown to Nigerian law.
Justice Donglong relied on Sections 15, 17, 25, and 42 of the 1999 Constitution, stressing that no Nigerian should suffer discrimination based on ethnicity, tribe, place of birth, or the circumstances of birth.
Describing the actions of the Jos North Local Government Council, the judge held that issuing a Residential Certificate to Fatima Akawu while issuing an Indigene Certificate to another applicant of Berom origin on the same day amounted to "a reprehensible act of ethnic discrimination."
The court consequently ordered the council to issue an indigene certificate to the claimant within 30 days and permanently restrained it from issuing Residential Certificates as substitutes for Certificates of Indigene.
The suit was instituted by Fatima Baba Akawu and her father, Baba Alhaji Akawu, against Jos North Local Government Area after the council allegedly refused to issue her an indigene certificate.
They argued that denying Fatima indigene status because she is Hausa violated the Constitution's provisions against discrimination and challenged the legality of the Residential Certificate, insisting it has no basis in Nigerian law.
The court agreed, holding that constitutional rights cannot be denied because of ethnic identity where a citizen is otherwise entitled to recognition under the law.
The ruling has reignited the decades-old indigene-settler debate that has remained one of the most contentious issues in Plateau State.
While the judgment has been welcomed by many within the Hausa-Fulani community as a victory for equal citizenship and constitutional rights, many Plateau indigenes argue that it contradicts established historical and judicial findings.
Several judicial commissions established after previous crises in Jos—including the Aribiton Fiberesima Commission (1994), the Niki Tobi Commission (2001), and the Bola Ajibola Commission (2008)—all concluded that the Afizere, Anaguta and Berom ethnic groups are the indigenous owners of Jos and Jos North.
The 2001 Niki Tobi Commission specifically recommended that the Hausa-Fulani community acknowledge the indigenous ownership of Jos by the Afizere, Anaguta and Berom as part of efforts toward lasting peace.
Legal experts, however, note that Justice Donglong's judgment does not overturn those historical findings but instead addresses whether constitutional rights can be denied based on ethnic origin.
PIDAN Rejects Verdict, Announces Appeal
In a swift response, the Plateau Initiative for Development and Advancement of the Natives (PIDAN) rejected the judgment, describing it as shocking and inconsistent with existing judicial precedents.
Following an emergency meeting of its leadership on June 13, PIDAN urged residents of Plateau State to remain calm and law-abiding while announcing plans to immediately challenge the judgment through the appellate courts.
According to the organization, the ruling appears to conflict with established decisions of previous judicial commissions as well as judgments affirmed by the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court regarding the indigenous ownership of Jos North.
PIDAN maintained that the question of indigenous ownership of Jos North had long been settled through multiple commissions of inquiry and subsequent judicial affirmations.
The group stated that its legal team has been directed to study the judgment and file an appeal aimed at setting it aside.
While acknowledging the constitutional rights of every Nigerian citizen to live anywhere in the country, PIDAN argued that citizenship should not automatically translate into indigeneship, insisting that indigeneship remains tied to ancestral ownership and customary rights.
The organization also pointed out that many Plateau indigenes born and raised in other states are similarly not recognized as indigenes in those states despite decades of residence, they argued that, going by the judgment, millions of Igbos and other ethnic groups can also claim indigene status in Lagos and other south-western states.
PIDAN therefore emphasized that no single High Court judgment can erase what it described as long-established legal history, gazetted White Papers and Supreme Court decisions recognizing the Afizere, Anaguta and Berom as the indigenous owners of Jos North.
The group called on Governor Caleb Mutfwang, security agencies, and all residents to maintain peace while allowing the legal process to run its course.
The judgment has drawn mixed reactions across the country.
Many members of the Hausa-Fulani community have hailed it as a landmark victory against ethnic discrimination, arguing that numerous families who have lived in Plateau State for generations continue to face exclusion from employment, education, scholarships and political opportunities because they are denied indigene certificates.
Others, however, believe the ruling has the potential to inflame existing tensions in Plateau State if not carefully managed, arguing that it raises broader questions about the relationship between constitutional citizenship rights and historical claims to indigenous ownership.
Former Plateau State Governor Jonah David Jang also opposed the judgment, warning that indigene certificates have historically been linked to communities recognized as the original inhabitants of Plateau State and should not be granted solely on the basis of long-term residence.
Although the Plateau State High Court has delivered what many legal scholars consider a landmark constitutional ruling on indigeneity, the matter is far from settled.
With PIDAN formally announcing its intention to appeal the decision and insisting that the judgment contradicts existing legal precedents and Supreme Court-backed findings, the case appears headed for further judicial scrutiny.
The outcome of the appeal could have far-reaching implications not only for Plateau State but also for other parts of Nigeria where disputes over indigeneity, citizenship and constitutional rights continue to shape access to political participation, employment, education and other public benefits.
Post a Comment