Court bars NLC, TUC, others from Embarking on Planned Protest

Justice Emmanuel Danjuma Sibilim of the National Industrial Court, Abuja, has restrained the Nigerian Labour Congress, NLC, Trade Union Congress, TUC, and three others from embarking on any form of industrial action or protest in the Federal Capital Territory, FCT, Abuja.

The three others restrained by the court on Monday are Comrades Benson Upah, General N.A. Toro, and Stephen Knabayi.

Justice Sibilim issued the order following an ex-parte application filed by the Minister of the FCT, Nyesom Wike, and the FCT Administration against the labour unions and their leaders, dated February 2.

The motion, drawn from Suit No: NICN/ABJ/30/26, was filed by Dr. Ogwu James Onoja (SAN) on behalf of the Minister and the FCTA.

After hearing the Claimants, Justice Sibilim granted an interim order restraining the 1st to 5th respondents and their agents or privies from embarking on any strike pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.

The court also directed the 5th to 9th defendants, who are security agencies, to ensure law and order is maintained in the FCT.

The Claimants told the court that the Chairman of the FCT Council of Labour Unions had sent a mobilization message to members and affiliated unions for a mass protest scheduled for February 3, which they said violates previous court orders.

According to the Claimants, following a ruling on January 27, the court’s order was served on the defendants the same day. Despite this, the NLC and TUC issued a statement directing all affiliated unions to intensify and sustain the strike.

The joint statement, signed by both unions, instructed striking workers to resume the strike, citing that the unions’ counsel, Femi Falana (SAN), had filed an appeal against the interlocutory ruling. Following this, JUAC issued a circular directing all employees to continue the strike.

The Claimants argued that this action was aimed at causing a breakdown of law and order in the nation’s capital.

Meanwhile, the court has adjourned the matter until February 10 for the hearing of the motion on notice.

The FCT Minister and FCTA said the application was predicated on the fact that:

“On January 19, 2026, workers employed by the 2nd Claimant, acting under the aegis of the Joint Unions Action Committee (JUAC), commenced an industrial action by locking entrances to offices and the secretariat of the Federal Capital Territory Administration, including schools and all departments and agencies of the 2nd Claimant, thereby bringing governmental functions and activities to a standstill.”

They noted that being law-abiding, the Claimants instituted action at the National Industrial Court, Abuja, in Suit No: NICN/ABJ/17/2026 between the FCT Minister & Anor v. Rifkatu Iortyer & Anor, wherein the court on January 27, 2026, granted an interlocutory injunction restraining JUAC, its affiliate unions, and employees of the 2nd Claimant from further industrial action and ordered them to resume work pending the substantive suit.

“Immediately the order was served, the 1st Defendant, acting through the 3rd Defendant, issued a directive titled: ‘REINFORCEMENT DIRECTIVE TO ALL AFFILIATE UNIONS IN THE FCT,’ urging workers to resume industrial action.”

“On January 28, 2026, the 1st and 2nd Defendants jointly issued another directive titled: ‘DEFEND YOUR RIGHTS WITH COURAGE AND DIGNITY: WE ARE WITH YOU,’ directing workers to resume industrial action and disregard the National Industrial Court order of January 27, 2026.”

“JUAC, the umbrella body for the employees and affiliate unions, followed these directives and instructed members to resume strike, as documented in the directive dated January 28, 2026, signed by Comrade Abdullahi Umar Saleh, Secretary, JUAC.”

“Acting on these directives, the 5th Defendant, as chairperson of the 1st Defendant FCT Council, issued a directive on January 31, 2026, mobilizing members for a mass protest in the FCT on February 3, 2026, at 7:00 am. This action was intended to cause chaos, disrupt law and order, and prevent the smooth administration of the 2nd Claimant.”

The Claimants expressed apprehension over potential lawlessness, obstruction of vehicular movement, and violation of the rights of residents, including those in the private sector, other government establishments, expatriates, and tourists, prompting them to seek judicial intervention.