By Dr. Tonye Clinton Jaja.
Dear Public Interest Lawyers,
On 2nd October 2025, Hon. Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja delivered a judgment wherein on the grounds of lack of locus standi and jurisdiction he dismissed the lawsuit filed against the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria for imposition of a State of Emergency in Rivers State. It is the case of Belema and Others Vs. President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and others.
Although, the reasons for his judgment are now the subject-matter of appeal and further judicial review by the appellate court, it provides insightful lessons for lawyers who file public interest lawsuits.
Let me begin with the issue of locus standi and how public interest lawyers can successfully overcome it.
It was in the year 2021 that I was officially inducted into the league of public interest litigation lawyers.
In the said year, I was conferred the award of Runner-up Prize of the Gani Fawehimi Person of Outstanding. The Integrity. The said prize was endowed and funded by the MacArthur Foundation while the organisation was conducted by the Human and Environmental Development Agenda (HEDA).
The Prize was handed over to me by Femi Falana, SAN in recognition of my courageous stand against the attempts at illegalities by a certain former Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) in my capacity as a former Chairman of the Governing Board of the Nigerian Copyright Commission.
Apart from both the intrinsic and monetary value that was conferred upon me by the said Prize, it also opened up a vast array of both human and intellectual resources in public interest litigation.
Under the informal pupillage, Femi Falana SAN, Tosin Ojaoma and Olanrewaju Suraju, to mention a few, the professional Association of Legislative lawyers (ALDRAP) which I co-founded in the year 2017, began undertaking public interest litigation for the first time.
We witnessed our first success when our litigation at the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, Abuja Division resulted in His Excellency President Bola Ahmed Tinubu (PBAT) refusal to assent to the Bill that sought to extend the tenure of the immediate past Clerk to the National Assembly.
We also witnessed a series of behind-the-scene successes whenever our pre-litigation and Pre-Action Notice letters resulted in invitations from both the Department of State Security Services (DSS) and other government agencies for out-of-court settlement meetings.
It was the trio of Femi Falana, SAN, Tosin Ojaoma and Olanrewaju Suraju that taught our Association-ALDRAP that before filing any action or litigation against any government official or institution, it is fundamentally important to submit a PRE-ACTION NOTICE in the form of a formal request for information pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, 2011.
It is only after the expiration of the 14 day period of notice wherein the said government official or institution has refused to respond that a lawsuit can be brought against them.
The trio of Femi Falana SAN,Tosin Ojaoma and Olanrewaju Suraju (especially Olanrewaju Suraju) gave me a compendium of ongoing corruption cases/lawsuits and by studying them I saw the pattern of successful lawsuits.
The common thread is that majority of the successful public interest litigation were framed as a refusal of the relevant government officials or institutions to respond to the requests of the Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) brought pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, 2011.
This was and still is the ingenious method of dodging and escaping the often over-used trap of preliminary objection of the issue of locus standi.
The Supreme Court of Nigeria has recently in April 2025 even expanded the application of the Freedom of Information Act, 2011 to the Officials and Agencies of the 36 States of Nigeria including the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) in its judgment in the case of Austin Osaku v. Edo State Agency for the Control of AIDS (EDOSACA) SC/614/2018.
To conclude, I will deal with the issue of jurisdiction.
Just as Hon. Justice James Omotosho cautioned, any successful public interest lawyer must undertake prior legal research to confirm the appropriate court of law that has the necessary jurisdiction to entertain their lawsuit.
In the matter of the proclamation of the State of Emergency in Rivers State, our NGO-ALDRAP undertook preliminary legal research and as advised by a professor of international and ECOWAS law, the Community Court of Justice of Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) was the most appropriate court of law. Based on this we filed a lawsuit at the said ECOWAS Court of Justice to challenge the imposition of a State of Emergency in Rivers State and the suspension of Governor Fubara.
This is because there is an 2001 ECOWAS Treaty to which Nigeria is a signatory to. The said ECOWAS Treaty prohibits the administration of any ECOWAS member State or sub-national units by unelected officials as President Bola Ahmed Tinubu (PBAT) did when he appointed a Sole Administrator of Rivers State.
Even though the issue of jurisdiction is a general rule, there are exceptions that a diligent lawyer can argue to persuade the court of law to assume jurisdiction especially when the issues for determination are still live issues.
In this regard, the lawyers that filed the lawsuit on the proclamation of the State of Emergency in Rivers State can argue at the Court of Appeal that the trial court ought to assume jurisdiction because some of the issues raised by the Proclamation of the State of Emergency in Rivers State are still live issues. For example, the issue of the expenditure of the funds of Rivers State by the Sole Administrator of Rivers State which the Supreme Court of Nigeria specifically stated ought to be the joint function of the Governor of Rivers State and the Rivers State House of Assembly.
On this point of distinguishing when the issue of jurisdiction is either academic or still live, see:
“…the Supreme Court of Nigeria judgment Suit Number SC/741/2015 delivered on 17th January 2025,
The Supreme Court held that the trial court is not embarking on a voyage of discovery when it provides details and background as to why it is declining jurisdiction on the grounds that the issues for determination are no longer live issues but have become academic issues.
See full citation below:
Between
Mrs Dorcas Ada Iheme
Oguzie Iheme
Anthony Iheme
Aguguo Iheme APPELLANTS
And
Attorney-General, Rivers State
Permanent Secretary, Lands Division
Governor’s Office, Rivers State
Rivers State Housing and Property Development Authority
Development Authority
The Supreme Court, in distinguishing the case of CHIADI v AGGO (2018) 2 NWLR (PT. 1603) 175, relied upon by Counsel for the Appellants from the facts of this case, held that in Chiadi’s case, the lease expired on the 30th April, 1971, and it was not renewed.”
On this note, I rest my case.
Yours faithfully,
Dr. Tonye Clinton Jaja,
5th October 2025.
