By Maryanne Awuya
Global Rights, NULAI Nigeria and Stakeholders gathered on Thursday in Abuja for a media and stakeholders roundtable as part of ongoing strategic litigation challenging provisions of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) 2020.
The meeting, attended by a Persecondnews correspondent, comes months after a Federal High Court judgment delivered on October 3, 2025, which upheld a preliminary objection but left the case open for appellate review.
Persecondnews recalls that the suits filed in September 2024 at the Federal High Court, Lagos, followed the mobilization of a high-level legal team, including Senior Advocates of Nigeria, to contest sections of CAMA believed to infringe on constitutional rights.
In the course of the proceedings, the case saw seven court appearances between 2024 and 2025 before the ruling was issued.
Organisers said the roundtable was aimed at providing journalists with clarity on the legal and constitutional issues at stake, particularly as the case progresses at the Court of Appeal.
They noted that although the trial court dismissed the case on grounds of lack of locus standi, the substantive issues remain unresolved.
Following the judgment, the legal team undertook a detailed review and proceeded to file a Notice of Appeal on January 2, 2026.
Records have since been transmitted to the Court of Appeal, Lagos Division, with hearings expected within the appellate timeline.
The litigation, supported by the Open Society Foundations, questions whether certain powers granted to the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) are consistent with constitutional guarantees, including the right to fair hearing, freedom of association, and civic participation.
The suit specifically challenges key provisions of the Act, including Section 824, which empowers the CAC to determine the classification of associations; Section 828(4), which grants the Commission authority over objections to the registration of Incorporated Trustees; and Sections 850(1)(d) and (2)(e), which relate to the CAC’s powers to dissolve organisations and revoke registrations.
Speaking at the event, legal practitioner, Mr. Innocent Lagi, said the case is fundamentally about upholding the rule of law.
“Laws must align with the Constitution. Any law that diminishes constitutional provisions is challengeable, and we will continue to challenge such laws to ensure governance in accordance with the Constitution,” he said.
He warned that allowing the contested provisions to stand would erode citizens’ rights.
“You cannot have the CAC act as the accuser, judge, and punisher at the same time. Matters that carry serious consequences must be determined by a court of law, not an administrative body,” Lagi said .
Prof. Sam Erugo (SAN) emphasized that the case touches on critical constitutional freedoms.
“Some provisions of CAMA appear to infringe on the right to fair hearing and freedom of association. Powers such as registration, classification, and even dissolution of civil society organisations should rest with the courts, not the CAC,” he said.
Erugo noted that the trial court did not address the substantive constitutional questions, expressing optimism that the appellate court would consider them.
“The court declined jurisdiction on technical grounds, but we are hopeful that on appeal, these fundamental issues will be properly determined,” he said .
Persecondnews reports that the plaintiffs in include the Incorporated Trustees of Global Rights and the Incorporated Trustees of Tap Initiative, while defendants are the Senate President, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Corporate Affairs Commission, and the Attorney General of the Federation.
Stakeholders at the roundtable stressed that the case goes beyond legal technicalities, describing it as a test of Nigeria’s commitment to protecting civic space and ensuring that regulatory frameworks do not undermine constitutional rights.
Persecondnews reports that the appeal now fully underway and parties are expected to exchange briefs ahead of hearings anticipated between July and December 2026, with the possibility of escalation to the Supreme Court depending on the outcome.
Author
Leave a comment