|
Listen to article
|
The National Industrial Court in Abuja is set to deliver a ruling on Tuesday in a lawsuit filed by Federal Capital Territory Minister Nyesom Wike and the FCT Administration seeking to halt an ongoing workers’ strike that has disrupted government operations across the capital.
Justice E.D. Subilim fixed the ruling date after hearing arguments from both sides on Monday in a case that could determine whether the Joint Union Action Committee can continue its industrial action.
The suit, filed by the FCT minister and the FCT Administration, targets JUAC leaders Rifkatu Iortyer and Abdullahi Umar Saleh. The claimants are asking the court to issue an interlocutory injunction restraining the union and its members from embarking on further strikes, picketing, or lockouts.
Read Also: Nyesom Wike Hosts Suspended Rivers Lawmakers In UK
The legal action comes as the strike, which began last Monday after a seven day ultimatum expired, continues to paralyze activities across key FCTA offices. Operations at the FCTA Secretariat in Abuja have been severely affected, with security personnel deployed to limit access to the complex.
FCT officials have said most of the workers’ demands were already addressed. Union leaders, however, rejected that claim, insisting that critical issues including unpaid entitlements remain unresolved.
Read Also: Our Strike Continues – JUAC Dismisses FCTA’s Claims
At Monday’s hearing, counsel to the workers’ union, Maxwell Opara, urged the court to dismiss the application. He argued that granting the injunction would amount to deciding the main case at an interim stage.
Opara referenced the Supreme Court ruling in Opara Agwu and Another v. Julius Berger Plc, warning that compelling workers to resume duties while salary issues persist could expose them to hardship. He also asked the court to consider arbitration that would require the FCT minister to personally attend negotiations.
Speaking after the proceedings, counsel to the claimants, James Onoja, Senior Advocate of Nigeria, questioned the legal standing of the Joint Union Action Committee.
According to Onoja, the defendants lack juristic personality and are not recognized under either the Companies and Allied Matters Act or the Trade Union Act. He described the group as an illegal body and argued that it cannot lawfully organize industrial action.
