Wike Seeks Court Order to Commit Striking FCT Workers for Alleged Contempt
The Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike, has applied to the National Industrial Court of Nigeria for an order to commit striking workers in the territory to prison, citing alleged disobedience of a subsisting court order. The application follows the continuation of an industrial action by FCT workers despite a judicial directive ordering them to suspend the strike.
Acting through his legal counsel, Ogwu Onoja, SAN, the FCT Minister obtained Form 48, a statutory notice warning of the consequences of disobedience to a court order. The document, which is to be served on the striking workers, warns that failure to comply with the order of the court would amount to contempt and could result in imprisonment.
Part of the notice reads: “Take note that unless you obey the directions contained in the order of Justice E. D. Subilim of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria delivered on the 27th day of January 2026, you will be guilty of the contempt of court and will be liable to be committed to prison.” The notice of consequence of disobedience, dated January 29, was signed by the Registrar of the Industrial Court, Mr Olajide Balogun.
Related News
DSS Tells Court Kaduna Man’s Tweets Could Drag Nigeria into Israel–Iran Conflict
Nigeria’s domestic intelligence agency, the Department of State Services (DSS), has told a court that social media posts allegedly made…
Nigeria Begins Evacuation of Citizens from Iran Amid Escalating Middle East Conflict
The Nigerian government has started evacuating its citizens from Iran as tensions in the Middle East intensify.
Nigeria Surpasses India in Number of People Living in Poverty – Report
New data shared by Statisense suggests that Nigeria now has a higher number of people living below the poverty line…
Justice Emmanuel Subilim of the National Industrial Court had earlier ordered the workers to immediately call off the strike pending the determination of the substantive issues before the court. The judge ruled that allowing the strike to continue while the court was seized of the matter could severely disrupt government activities and essential services within the Federal Capital Territory.
In his ruling, Justice Subilim acknowledged that the right to strike is a legitimate means through which workers may express grievances. However, he emphasized that such a right is not absolute. Citing Section 18(1)(b) of the Trade Disputes Act, the court held that workers are prohibited from embarking on industrial action over disputes that have already been referred to the National Industrial Court for adjudication.
The minister, in the originating summons filed before the court, argued that the ongoing strike did not comply with the provisions of the Trade Disputes Act. He further contended that the Joint Unions Action Committee, which reportedly coordinated the strike, is not a registered trade union and therefore lacks the legal standing to declare or sustain an industrial action.
According to the minister’s submission, the continuation of the strike despite a clear court order amounts to a direct challenge to judicial authority and undermines the rule of law. The application for contempt proceedings, he argued, was necessary to compel compliance and preserve the integrity of the judicial process.
The development has sparked widespread public reactions, particularly on social media and online forums. While some commentators have defended the minister’s actions as a lawful attempt to enforce a court order and maintain governance in the nation’s capital, others have criticized the move as heavy-handed and punitive. Critics argue that resorting to contempt proceedings against workers raises concerns about the balance between enforcing court orders and protecting labour rights.
The controversy has also reignited broader discussions around labour relations, executive authority, and the role of the judiciary in industrial disputes. Some observers have called for dialogue and negotiation as a more sustainable approach to resolving the impasse, warning that legal escalation could further strain relations between the government and public sector workers.
The case has been adjourned to March 25, 2026, for hearing. Until then, the legal and industrial standoff between the FCT administration and the striking workers remains unresolved, with significant implications for public service delivery and labour relations within the Federal Capital Territory.