DSS Suit Against Utomi’s Parallel Govt In Line With Law – Adamson (SAN)

Amidst the ongoing debate surrounding Prof. Pat Utomi’s announcement of a shadow government, Mr. Adeboro Adamson (SAN) has voiced his support for the Department of State Services (DSS) taking legal action against the professor.

Speaking on Arise TV on Sunday night, Adamson commended the DSS for acting within its constitutional boundaries and described their approach as “civilised” and legally sound.

He said: “The DSS has a mandate, which includes the detection and prevention of subversion, terrorism, espionage, among others.

“If one of the mandates of the DSS is to prevent subversion, how do we situate the statement of the erudite professor that he has assembled people who will man what he tagged a shadow cabinet?”

Persecondnews had reported that Utomi, a notable voice in opposition circles, recently unveiled what he called the “Big Tent Coalition Shadow Government,” describing it as a “national emergency response” initiative.

He explained that the initiative aims to track the current administration’s performance, pinpoint governance gaps, and offer alternative policy solutions in crucial sectors.

However, the initiative has sparked intense reactions from both political figures and legal experts.

Viewing the initiative as a potential threat to national stability, the DSS filed a suit to determine the constitutional legitimacy of the parallel governance structure.

Utomi, however, maintained that his coalition did not violate any laws or constitutional provisions.

During the shadow government’s launch event, he said: “This is not an attempt to overthrow the government. It is a national emergency response. We will observe, critique and offer alternatives in education, health, security, and governance.”

Justifying the agency’s decision, Adamson argued that it fell within their mandate and was a better alternative to resorting to criminal prosecution.

He said: “Some might ask why the DSS chose a civil suit over a criminal one? My answer is that the DSS has chosen to submit to the courts to determine if the actions and utterances of the revered professor can be situated within the confines of the Constitution. This is a civilised way of doing things.”