A REVIEW OF THE IGBO TRADITIONAL SYSTEM OF INHERITANCE AND AN EXAMINATION OF THE DISCRIMINATORY ASPECTS CONSIDERING RECENT PRONOUNCEMENTS BY THE COURTS IN NIGERIA
ABSTRACT
The Igbo tribe is one of the three major tribes in Nigeria and like the other two tribes has its own distinctive culture. The Igbo People can be found in the South-eastern part of Nigeria and are spread across states such as Enugu, Ebonyi, Anambra, Abia, Imo and Delta State. This paper aims at examining the System of intestate succession under the general Igbo System and will also be considering the practices of specific communities and ethnic groups. The general system of inheritance under the Igbo culture is the primogenitor (where the eldest son inherits to the exclusion of the other children but for the benefit of other children). We will examine the nature of the position of the eldest son as it relates to inheritance. This paper will also examine certain myths and misconceptions as relating to the Igbo cultural system of intestate succession
The Igbo System is said to be discriminatory against the women particularly the widows as they are not capable of inheriting from their husbands under customary law, in the same vein the female children are also not entitled to inherit from their father. The entire scope of the customary law of disinheriting the female clan will be examined in light of the rationale behind the customary law, what obtains under other customary laws, the relationship between this customary rule of intestacy and the provisions of the Nigerian Constitution and other laws in force in Nigeria. This paper will also examine the decision of the Superior courts in Nigeria on the issue and the perception of the pronouncements of these courts and an analysis of the decisions.
This paper will also examine the position of some other classes such as adopted children, illegitimate children, Outcasts (‘Osu’) and other male children. The different types of property capable of being inherited and by whom will also be highlighted by the paper. This paper will offer recommendations to the different stake holders such as the Village Kings and Chiefs, law makers and Judges in ensuring that the efficacy of the Igbo cultural system of inheritance is more suitable to a twenty-first century and developing Nigeria.
INTRODUCTION TO SUCCESION IN IGBO LAND.
This part of the article seeks to address the general and entire regime of succession of the Igbo tribe of Nigeria. The Igbo tribe can be mainly found in South-Eastern Nigeria and is the dominant tribe in Anambra, Ebonyi, Enugu, Imo, Abia and Rivers States. Noteworthy is the fact that there are many other different tribes among the general Igbo communities, which then means that it is not impossible to have variations on certain general matters particularly as it relates to succession or inheritance in Igbo Land.
Succession can be defined to mean the acquisition of rights or property by inheritance under the laws of descent and distribution[1]. From this definition it is evident that succession is usually guided by certain laws of distribution. The law of succession therefore involves the transmission of the rights and obligations of the deceased person in respect of his estate to his heirs and successors[2]. There are basically two types of succession, and they are: testate and intestate succession. The former refers to succession, where the deceased person to be inherited has written a will while the latter refers to the succession of a deceased who has not written a will.
In Nigeria intestate succession is governed either by the administration of estate laws or the customary law of the deceased. The administration of estate laws will be the applicable law where the deceased married under the act[3] whereas the customary law will apply to a person who has not married under the Marriage Act and has died intestate. In Okon v Administrator-General of Cross River State[4] it was held that a marriage contracted under the Marriage Act takes precedence over a marriage contracted either under native law or Islamic law.
Under Igbo Customary law, like other ethnic groups in Nigeria, succession follows the blood but under Igbo customary law, inheritance takes the primogeniture form which is succession by the first male child to the exclusion of other children[5]. In the event a woman dies intestate all her property which she acquired before the marriage will be acquired by her maiden family while property she acquired during the course of the marriage will be acquired by the husband[6]. The general Igbo Customary law does not permit women to inherit and as such inheritance is limited to the male clan. In Ugboma v Ibeneme[7] the court held that in accordance with the general Igbo custom, women are not entitled to inherit from their father.
The tradition of primogeniture entails the total non-negotiable handing over of power of attorney over properties, titles and positions to the eldest son of a family. The eldest male child becomes the head of the family and he occupies the family house, holding same as trustee of the other children, male or female. In the Onitsha community, for instance, the deceased’s property devolves to the eldest son exclusively, in accordance with the rule of primogeniture, under which the eldest son is expected to look after younger children and may sell the house over the wishes of other children or treat it as his own property[8].
Things Capable of being inherited
Both tangible and intangible things owned by the deceased are capable of being inherited. Examples of tangible things capable of being inherited include landed property, farms, money, cars, machines and others. Intangible things capable of being inherited are chieftaincy titles and succession to the crown.
In areas where Succession to the crown is hereditary, the Mantle of Leadership of king ‘Igwe’ is in a central Palace, the property is communal among the people especially those who are heirs to the throne, every male son is given a piece of land from the communal land[9]. Due to Modern Civilization the position of the Igwe is not hereditary in some communities, however in those areas where the igwe is not hereditary he’s appointed and when he has served his tenure the mantle of igwe moves from his family to another, so it applies that whatever he inherited from his father would be his own son’s inheritance. In the ‘Nri Aguukwu’ or ‘Aguukwu Nri’ Igbo community what is obtainable is the rotation of the office of the ‘igwe’.
The First Son
The role of the first son is very important in any discussion of the Igbo customary law of succession as the cardinal principle of succession under Igbo customary law is the primogeniture system, where the first son inherits to the exclusion of other children. The first son is known as the ‘Okpala’ and he plays a very important role in the administration of his father’s estate as in Orlu LGA, Imo state the first son is the chief administrator of his father’s property.
The importance of the first son’s position under the Igbo Customary law of succession was confirmed by the court in Ejimaike v Ejimaike[10] the court held that the right of the eldest surviving son succeeding the headship of his father is automatic and only his father who is the owner and the creator of the family property can deprive the eldest son of this right by a valid direction. In the absence of any direction by the father the right of the eldest son cannot be taken away.
It is however important to point out that the first son does not enjoy all the property without some responsibilities. The Okpala is responsible for his mother during her lifetime and he is also to cater for the needs of the younger ones all from the inherited property. These are duties the Okpala cannot shy away from his responsibilities. For instance, in Umuawulu, Awka-South LGA, Anambra State, where the Okpala becomes greedy the ‘Umunna’ (kindred) would come in to do the sharing of land for the sons ‘Ebe obibi’ or the most senior uncle to the sons in the extended family and if he’s needs more help he would also bring the umunna into the matter.
It is therefore apparent that the rationale behind the Okpala inheriting to the exclusion of every other person is to ensure that the Okpala continues to hold the house in order and keeps the family as one seeing as he becomes the head of the family after the demise of his father. It is also seen that the powers of the Okpala are not without any restrictions or control.
Other Sons
The other sons of the deceased are not disinherited from the estate of the deceased but have their inheritance rights subject to that of the first son. In Umuawulu, before the deceased dies he must give his male sons piece of land not minding how many sons he has where they would build their houses(homes) as this is their entitlement and is to be counted entirely separate from his estate. So also, the same way the first son inherits the fathers house, the last son inherits the the mother’s kitchen and out-house.
In Oru LGA of Imo state, the eldest son inherits the house and everything within the compound while the other sons are entitled to inherit and share the property of the man outside the house. The other sons are also entitled to share in the money which the deceased person must have left behind.
Wives and Daughters.
Generally, under Igbo Customary law women do not possess the rights to inherit and, that is, neither the daughters nor the widows of the deceased have the right in the intestate estate of the deceased[11].
A widow has no ownership rights over the property of her deceased husband and she is only entitled to possessory rights of her husband’s house which is subject to good behaviour. A widow has no rights to keep any movable property, even if she used the same property during her husband’s life. She is given the right to reap fruit from trees on the matrimonial estate[12]. It does not matter if she is survived by sons or not. In Nezianya V. Okagbue[13] it was held that possession by a widow of her husband’s land cannot be averse to the right of her husband‟ family to enable her acquire an absolute right to possession of it against the family.
The Supreme Court in the case of Chinweze V. Masi[14] held that under customary law, a wife has only a life interest in the property of her deceased husband and if he dies, her interest ceases.
For the widows, they are not left without any form of protection, in as much as a widow cannot inherit from her husband, the first son who inherits from the father is charged with the responsibility of taking care of the widow and his younger sisters if they have not attained the age of marriage. In Bende LGA of Abia state, a female child is not allowed to inherit as it is believed that they will marry and leave their father’s house to be catered for by their husbands and as such do not need to inherit. From the interviews conducted, it was gathered that this seems to be a standard practice across board that the widow only has a life interest in her matrimonial home and her maintenance becomes the duty of the first son of the house.
Illegitimate Children and ‘Osu’
Illegitimate children are the children which the deceased has outside wedlock. The position of these children is however precarious as their entitlement to inherit is only premised on the condition that they must be acknowledged before they are able to inherit from the deceased.
The Osu system has been abolished in Nigeria, however under the old traditional Igbo society, particularly in Orlu LGA of Imo state Osu people are able to inherit only from or amongst themselves.
AN ANALYSIS OF THE CONTROVERSIAL ASPECT OF THE IGBO SYSTEM OF INHERITANCE AND RELEVANT LAWS IN NIGERIA.
The Igbo cultural system of succession like that of every other tribe in Nigeria has some controvertial elements. The one principle of succession under Igbo Customary law which is the most debated is the disinheritance of the female clan. It has been argued that the particular principle is discriminatory and touches on the fundamental human rights of the women who are disinherited.
The 1999 Constitution of Nigeria provides that:
A citizen of Nigeria of a particular community, ethnic group, place of origin, sex, religion or political opinion shall not, by reason only that he is such a person: –
(a) be subjected either expressly by, or in the practical application of, any law in force in Nigeria or any executive or administrative action of the government, to disabilities or restrictions to which citizens of Nigeria of other communities, ethnic groups, places of origin, sex, religious or political opinions are not made subject; or
(b) be accorded either expressly by, or in the practical application of, any law in force in Nigeria or any such executive or administrative action, any privilege or advantage that is not accorded to citizens of Nigeria of other communities, ethnic groups, places of origin, sex, religious or political opinions[15]
It can be seen from the provisions of this particular section of the constitution that any discrimination on the grounds of the sex of a person will amount to a breach of the fundamental human right of such person. This section has been extensively discussed and examined by the court in respect to the interpretation and explanation of the Igbo customary system of inheritance.
The High Court Laws of Lagos State provide that any custom which is repugnant natural justice, equity and good conscience will be inapplicable.
The High Court Rules in as much as it has accepted the application of customs by Nigerian courts also tries to ensure that these questions do not go against the cardinal principle of human existence and has made sure to declare any custom which is repugnant to Natural Justice, equity and good conscience. It would therefore not be out of place to say that the Igbo customary law of succession which disinherits women should be inapplicable as it is repugnant to equity. Whether or not the definition of equity in this context refers to the ordinary meaning or the technical meaning, any culture which seeks to disinherit women at the benefit of the men is not equitable and as such should be inapplicable.
AN ANALYSIS OF DECISIONS OF NIGERIAN COURTS ON THE DISINHERITANCE OF WOMEN UNDER IGBO CUTOMARY LAW OF INHERITANCE.
As established through interviews and the decisions of the courts stated earlier, it is evident that it is trite in Igbo land that women (whether widows or children) are not entitled to inherit from their father. This custom appears to be discriminatory and goes against cardinal principles of fundamental freedoms and rights entrenched in the Nigerian 1999 Constitution. The section particular in view is Section 42 of the Constitution which guarantees the right to freedom from discrimination and it provides that no citizen of Nigeria regardless of their place of origin, sex, religion or political opinion shall be discriminated against. The key word here is discrimination based on sex and the Igbo customary law clearly excludes women from inheriting property, particularly landed property.
This would mean that the custom is repugnant to natural justice, equity and good conscience but it is important to note that the fact that a custom does not conform to standard English law rules or general rules would not render such custom invalid or repugnant[16].
Mojekwu v Mojekwu [1997] 7 N.W.L.R 283
The Facts o the case are as follows: The appellant, Mr. Augustine Mojekwu, relying on the Oli-Ekpe custom of some parts of South-East Nigeria, had instituted action against the respondent, Mrs. Caroline Mojekwu, claiming that he was entitled to inherit her deceased husband’s property. The basis for his claim was that the deceased, his paternal uncle, was survived by the respondent and two daughters. Being all women, they were excluded from inheriting property under the Oli-Ekpe customary laws applying to the deceased. The appellant’s Counsel argued that the Oli-Ekpe custom allowed the deceased’s closest male relative to inherit if he had no son. The closest male relative would have been the appellant’s father, who was also the deceased’s brother. However, the appellant’s father was dead, and the appellant had become his heir. As a result, the appellant claimed ownership of the deceased’s house situated in the town of Onitsha, which the deceased had built on the land he had acquired from the Mgbelekeke family of Onitsha. The respondent claimed that her son, Patrick, who had predeceased his father, had fathered an infant son who should inherit the property. Disputing this fact, the appellant claimed that Patrick had died without a son.
The Court of Appeal determined the Oli-ekpe custom to be repugnant and applied the Repugnancy Doctrine. This doctrine prescribes that the courts shall not enforce any custom as law if it is contrary to public policy or repugnant to natural justice, equity and good conscience. The Court also pronounced the custom contrary to human rights guarantees in the Nigerian Constitution and in the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women, which prohibit discrimination on the ground of sex.
This decision before the reversal by Supreme Court in a subsequent decision overruled the decision of the Court of Appeal. That decision will be examined separately but it is important to analyse the reasoning and decision of the Court of Appeal in the case when it stated
“All human beings – male and female – are born into a free world, and are expected to participate of freely, without any inhibition on grounds of sex; and that is constitutional. Any form of societal discrimination on ground of sex, apart from being unconstitutional is antithetical to a society built on the tenets of democracy, which we have freely chosen as a people. We need not travel all the way to Beijing to know that some of our customs, including the Nnewi “Oli-ekpe” customs are not consistent with our civilized world in which we all live today. In my humble view, it is the monopoly of God to determine the sex of a baby and not the parents. Accordingly, for a custom or customary law to discriminate against a particularly sex is to say the least an affront, I have no difficulty in holding that the “Oli-ekpe” custom of Nnewi, is repugnant to natural justice, equity and good consciences.”
From this statement and quotations cited above, it is evident that the necessity of balancing the right to a cultural identity of a particular tribe and the right against discrimination of women is apparent and as such one must properly understand the core of these right in order to have a proper analysis. The decision of the Court of Appeal seemed to have been the beginning of a new era for women in Igbo land as a custom which discriminated and excluded them from inheriting had been declared invalid by a superior court in the country. This victory was however short-lived when the Supreme court overturned the decision in Mojekwu v. Iwuchukwu.
Mojekwu v. Iwuchukwu [2004] 4. S.C. (Pt.II). 1.
This decision was based on an appeal against the Court of Appeal’s judgement in Mojekwu v Mojekwu to the Supreme Court.
Faced with the same facts and legal issue, the Supreme Court argued that the rules of procedure precluded the Court of Appeal from determining whether Oli-ekpe was repugnant since neither of the parties to the case brought the validity of the custom as a legal issue before the court. The Supreme Court, led by Justice S.O. Uwaifo, criticized the Court of Appeal pronouncement as follows:
“I cannot see any justification for the court below to pronounce that the Nnewi native custom of ‘[o]li-ekpe’ was repugnant to natural justice, equity and good conscience…the learned justice of appeal was no doubt concerned about the perceived discrimination directed against women by the said Nnewi ‘oli-ekpe’ custom and that is quite understandable. But the language used made the pronouncement so general and far-reaching that it seems to cavil at, and is capable of causing strong feelings against, all customs which fail to recognise a role for women. For instance, the custom and traditions of some communities which do not permit women to be natural rulers or family heads. The import is that those communities stand to be condemned without a hearing for such fundamental custom and tradition they practice by the system by which they run their native communities.”
In as much as the decision of the Supreme Court might seem to be a step backwards, it is very difficult to fault the reasoning of learned Justice Uwaifo as it is an already settled principle of law that customary law is not merely repugnant because it does not conform to the English law or is foreign to a person and appears to be unjust, but a custom will be repugnant if it clearly goes against the principle of natural justice, equity and good conscience. However, it can be said that some custom which purports to exclude a specific group of people based from benefits based on their sex is not equitable and hence is repugnant to equity.
Ukeje v Ukeje (2014) LPELR-22724(SC)
The Facts of the case are as follows: On 27th December 1981, Lazarus Ogbonnaya Ukeje, a native of Umuahia in Imo State (presently Abia State) died intestate. He had real property in Lagos State and for most of his life was resident in Lagos State. The 1st Appellant got married to the deceased on 13th December 1956. There are four children of the marriage. The respondent is one of the four. After Lazarus Ogbonnaya Ukeje died, the 1st and 2nd Appellants (mother and son) obtained letters of administration for and over the deceased’s estate.
On being aware of this development, the Plaintiff/Respondent filed an action in court wherein she claimed to be a daughter of the deceased and by virtue of that fact had a right to partake in sharing of her late father’s estate. Her claims before a Lagos State High Court were five (5) reliefs. Pleadings were filed and exchanged. The Respondent as Plaintiff testified and called her mother as second witness. Thirteen witnesses gave evidence for the defence. Thirty-four documents were admitted as exhibits. These included the birth certificate of the Respondent showing that she is a daughter of the deceased, L.O. Ukeje, family photographs of the Respondent and her deceased father and a guarantor form the deceased L.O Ukeje filled for the Respondent acknowledging that he was the father of the Respondent.
The trial court in its judgment found that the Plaintiff/Respondent is a daughter of the L.O. Ukeje (deceased) and proceeded to grant reliefs 2, 3, and 4. As regards relief 5, the trial court ordered the 1st and 2nd Appellants to hand over the administration of the estate to the Administrator-General pending when the deceased children would choose 3 or 4 of them to apply for fresh letters of administration.
The Appellants were aggrieved with the judgment of the trial court and appealed to the Court of Appeal which dismissed their appeal.
The Appellants again were dissatisfied with the judgment of the Court of Appeal and they appealed to the Supreme Court which upheld the decisions of the two courts below[17].
The court in relying on the provisions of the Section 42 of the 1999 Constitution held per Rhodes-Vivour JSC:
“No matter the circumstances of the birth of a female child, such a child is entitled to an inheritance from her late father’s estate. Consequently, the Igbo customary law which disentitles a female child from partaking, in the sharing of her deceased lather’s estate is in breach of section 42 (1) and (2) of the Constitution, a fundamental rights provision guaranteed to every Nigerian. The said discriminatory customary law is void as it conflicts with section 42(1) and (2) of the Constitution.”
In the same vein Ogunbiyi JSC commented on the matter and held that:
“The trial court, I hold did rightly declare as unconstitutional, the law that disinherits children from their deceased father’s estate. It follows therefore that the Igbo native law and custom which deprives children born out of wedlock from sharing the benefit of their father’s estate is conflicting with section 42(2) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).”
One of the major criticisms of this particular decision is the fact that the Supreme Court Justices did not appear to have a full understanding of the customs of the Ibo people as they were from the South-western part of the country which has a completely different regime for the sharing of a deceased properties and might have judged the validity of the custom bearing in mind what obtains under their culture. In as much as the provisions of the constitution were invoked the learned Supreme court justices appeared to have undermined the validity of the custom of the Ibo people.
Having said that the decision is a laudable one as customs are not meant to be static[18] and as held by the court in Lewis v Bankole[19] that one of the major characteristics of Customary law it its flexibility. The Supreme Court has been able to use its decision in this case to channel the development of the Igbo Customary system of inheritance, and using its powers and the law as an instrument of social change seeing as the society itself is changing its attitude towards patriarchy and now adopting the views of feminism – the equality of both genders.
CONCLUSION
Flowing from all that has been said, it can be seen that the Igbo people have a very unique culture and their custom on the succession of deceased persons is quite distinct from other tribes in that a lot of other things which are not considered on the systems of succession of other tribes. One important thing that has also been evident is the fact that although there are certain principles of succession that are common across board, there are however certain Igbo communities that have one or two variations. This further clarifies the position of the court in Edokpolor v Idehen[20] when it stated that customary law is not constant but relative and varies with localities.
Although the custom appears to have some internal checks and balances within the system such as the eldest only holding such property in trust for the other children, but it is important to establish that most of these customs are based on Patriarchy – a social system in which males are the primary authority figures central to social organization, occupying roles of political leadership, moral authority, control of property, and where fathers hold authority over women and children. That control is maintained by excluding women from access to necessary economically productive resources and by restricting women’s sexuality. Attached to this philosophy is absolute control over all spheres of life by men including but not limited to direction on political, social, cultural and economic rights.
Another reason that has been a hindrance to the position of the women is the payment of bride price as in most cultures, a woman is considered legally and fully married to her husband if her bride price has been paid and also a marriage is not reckoned to have ended until the return of bride-price paid has been acknowledged. This why some cultures still consider women as chattels capable of being inherited.
There is no doubt that the Supreme Court decision in Ukeje v. Ukeje (supra) has come to stay because its decision is final, and an appeal can only rely to God[21]. Upon examination of the Supreme Court decisions in Ukeje v. Ukeje (supra) and Mojekwu v. Iwuchukwu (supra), where similar issues were raised, and the same pronouncements were expected by the Apex Court, it is unambiguous that the former was premature in declaring the custom unconstitutional while the later gave the custom an opportunity to be judicially revisited in the immediate future. These two conflicting decisions of the Supreme Court have been noted in our principle of stare decisis and will exist concurrently as persuasive decision of the apex court until another decision of the court comes up to either overrule or uphold any of the previous the decisions. Until that time, the recent decision of the Supreme Court has left our judicial system in a quandary and we expect the Justices of the Apex Court to act in the right direction in upholding the course of justice in this area of our law whenever the opportunity comes in the near future[22].
RECOMMENDATIONS.
First of the recommendations to be given is that the Culture of writing wills should be promoted and embraced by the people especially in Nigeria where customary law is strong. Where people make their wills appropriately, the application of discriminatory customary practices would be averted. The writing of a will takes away the tenure of intestate succession, hence the application or role of customary law will have no impact.
We also recommend that the Mass media should be utilised to create awareness about the problems of discriminatory succession practices in this day and age. Radio and TV channels, newspapers are vital tools in this aspect.
Seeing as the law is an instrument of positive change, aimed at correcting societal ills. Legislators should be proactive and enact reformative laws to alleviate discriminatory practices in succession, especially among the Igbo ethnic group. Also, international human right instruments which promote the rights of females to be free from discrimination such as the CEDAW which Nigeria is signatory to, should be domesticated by the legislature. This is because by virtue of being a party to the adoption and ratification of these instruments, Nigeria should be committed to the full implementation of the spirit of the instruments.
The courts should apply the provisions of domesticated international human rights charters to matters of female inheritance. For instance, the African Charter which promotes women’s rights against any form of discrimination should be applied by the judiciary as a cure to any lacunae in or limitation to women’s rights under Nigerian law.
The three tiers of government should engage in bringing reformative change in the society by taking steps to alleviate discriminatory inheritance practices in Nigeria. Awareness should be created in the society. Training and empowering programs for both men and women should be initiated to sensitise them on the right of both sexes to inherit both real and personal property.
The government should also establish gender based monitoring agencies to prevent discriminatory practices against females in succession, especially in the Eastern part of Nigeria.
Traditional rulers should also make efforts to reform the deplorable inheritance practices in Igboland. They should enlighten their subjects on the wrongfulness and evils of such practices.
Also, they can assist in the modification of cultural practices to reflect the modern trends in society. Thus, succession practices will be adaptable and acceptable to the 21st century world. A total abolition of certain cultures which are beyond reform may also be undertaken.
[1] Black’s Law Dictionary, Ninth Edition, page 1
[2] T.O.G. Animashaun & A.B. Oyeniyin ‘Law of Succession, Wills and Probate in Nigeria’ (2002), MIJ Publishers.
[3] Marriage Act, Cap 218 LFN 1990.
[4] (1992) 6 NWLR pt. 248 p 473
[5] B.A. Oni ‘Discriminatory Property Inheritance Rights under Yoruba and Igbo Customary Law in Nigeria: The Need For Reforms’ IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science Vol 19, Issue 2.
[6] Nwugege v Adigwe(1936) 11 NLR 134;267.
[7] (1967) F.N.L.R. 251.
[8] T.O Elias, ‘Nigerian Land Law’ 4th ed., (Sweet & Maxwell London, (1971) chapter 8), p. 120
[9] This is called stool land and is similar to the ‘Iga Idungaran’ of the Oba of Lagos which was held in Oba Adeyinka Oyekan v Oba Adele II (1952) 14 WACA 209 to be traditional residence of the Obas and was made by the people to be in trust for the use of the Obas. For emphasis see, I.O. Smith ‘Practical Approach to Law of Real Property in Nigeria’.
[10] (1972) 2 ENLR P. 11.
[11] B.A. Oni, supra
[12] R. Mordi ‘AN APPRAISAL OF INHERITANCE RIGHTS OF WOMEN IN NIGERIA’ https://www.academia.edu/7187814/AN_APPRAISAL_OF_INHERITANCE_RIGHTS_OF_WOMEN_IN_NIGERIA?auto=download accessed 5th February, 2018.
[13] (1963) 1 ALL, NLR 352.
[14] (1989) 1 NWLR (pt. 97) 254, 270
[15]1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Cap 23 LFN 2004, section 42.
[16] Section 26(1) of the Lagos State High Court Law
[17] Ukeje v. Ukeje: Nigerian Constitution Forbids Female Disinheritance https://independent.ng/ukeje-v-ukeje-nigerian-constitution-forbids-female-disinheritance/ Accessed 8 February, 2018.
[18] The Court in Alfa v Arepo (1963) WNLR 95 at 97 held that Customary law is not a static law and the law can change with the times and the rapid development of social and economic condition.
[19] (1908) 1 NLR 81 at 100.
[20] (1961) WNLR 11at 13.
[21] A REVIEW OF THE ISSUES AND DECISION ON THE SUPREME COURT INVALIDATION OF THE IGBO CUSTOMARY LAW DENYING FEMALE DESCENDANTS THE RIGHT OF INHERITANCE: UKEJE V. UKEJE (2014) 11 NWLR (PT.1418) 384
[22] Ibid.
Mo's blog 
I need the Edo state administration of estate and not delta state
LikeLike