Legal Dispute Over NURTW’s Activities in Oyo State
A recent legal dispute has emerged between the Oyo State government and the National Union of Road Transport Workers (NURTW), centered around the suspension of the union’s activities. This conflict stems from a long-standing disagreement that dates back to 2011, when the state government, under the leadership of former Governor Abiola Ajimobi, proscribed the Oyo State Chapter of NURTW.
The proscription was challenged in court, leading to a significant ruling by the Federal High Court in Ibadan. On May 25, 2012, the court declared the proscription illegal, unconstitutional, null, and void. Despite this judgment, the situation escalated again on May 19, 2019, when Governor Seyi Makinde announced the suspension of NURTW’s activities, including the collection of check-off dues from parks and garages across the state.
This move was met with strong opposition from the union, which viewed it as another unlawful interference with its operations. The NURTW Chairman, Abideen Olajide, also known as Ejiogbe, expressed the union’s readiness to resume work at any moment. He assured the government and residents that NURTW is a law-abiding group that can coexist with motor park managers while fulfilling its responsibilities to members statewide.
Legal Challenges and Court Rulings
In response to the ongoing dispute, a lawyer named Mrs. Funmi Falana criticized the state Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Abiodun Aikomo, for allegedly misrepresenting the appellate court’s judgment. Falana, who serves as counsel for NURTW, sent a letter to Aikomo highlighting the explicit nature of the court’s decision, which stated that the state government had no authority to proscribe or suspend the activities of NURTW.
Falana accused the state government of substituting its own views for the clear and binding pronouncements of the Court of Appeal. She warned against further acts of contempt and disobedience, emphasizing that failure to comply with the court’s ruling could lead to serious legal consequences, including contempt proceedings and disciplinary action before the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee.
The legal battle continued through various courts, with NURTW challenging the suspension before the National Industrial Court. In Suit No: NICN/IB/41/2021 (NURTW v. Governor of Oyo State & Ors.), the court initially dismissed the union’s suit, stating that the suspension did not amount to proscription or de-registration. However, NURTW appealed to the Court of Appeal, Ibadan Division, which ultimately overturned the lower court’s decision.
Court of Appeal’s Decision
In its lead judgment, the Court of Appeal held that the government failed to justify the suspension of NURTW’s operations on any lawful ground. The court noted that, apart from allegations of breach of peace and intimidation, there were no specific incidents or conduct by NURTW members that warranted the suspension. As a result, the court allowed the appeal, set aside the suspension of NURTW’s operations, and overturned the judgment of the lower court.
Falana emphasized that the continued refusal of the government to reinstate NURTW’s lawful operations contravenes the constitution and undermines the sanctity of the judiciary. She urged the Attorney-General to advise the governor to fully comply with the appellate court’s decision to restore NURTW’s activities and rights in the state or risk facing contempt proceedings.
Implications for the Judiciary and Government
The case highlights the importance of upholding judicial decisions and the potential consequences of non-compliance. Section 287(2) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) mandates that the decisions of the Court of Appeal must be enforced by all authorities and persons throughout the federation. Falana reminded the Attorney-General of this constitutional duty, warning that failure to obey the appellate court’s ruling would attract serious legal consequences.
As the dispute continues, the outcome will have significant implications for both the judiciary and the government. It underscores the need for adherence to legal rulings and the protection of fundamental rights, ensuring that the rule of law prevails in all aspects of governance.
