Ohha Microfinance Sues Enugu Government for ₦20.4bn Over Demolition

The Enugu State Government is facing a ₦20.4bn lawsuit filed by Ohha Microfinance Bank Limited over the demolition of the bank’s headquarters and other properties in Enugu, with court documents indicating that the state obtained an offer letter for the lease of the disputed land three months after the demolition.

The development is contained in the state government’s Statement of Defence in the suit, marked E/37/2025, which is pending before Justice Cyprian Ajah of the Enugu State High Court, Enugu Judicial Division.

According to the court documents, the Railway Property Management communicated an offer for the lease of the land at Holy Ghost, Enugu, to the state government in a letter dated August 15, 2024. The state subsequently accepted the offer.

However, the demolition of properties belonging to Ohha Microfinance Bank and hundreds of other businesses had taken place on May 15, 2024, months before the lease offer was formally communicated.

The dispute has raised questions over the timing of the land acquisition, the legal basis for the demolition and the compensation payable to affected property owners.

Bank Challenges Legality of Land Lease

In its response to the state government’s defence, Ohha Microfinance Bank, represented by human rights lawyer Olu Omotayo, argued that the lease offer was illegal because it was obtained three months after the destruction of the properties.

The bank’s legal team maintained that the government carried out the demolition without first securing valid title to the land.

The plaintiff argued that the subsequent lease documentation could not retrospectively legitimise the demolition, which it described as unlawful.

The state government, in its defence filed by G.I. Iloma, an Assistant Chief Legal Officer, stated that the land was leased from Railway Property Company Limited.

It also argued that Rev. Fr. Prof. Emmanuel Edeh of Our Saviour Institute of Science, Agriculture and Technology (OSISATECH) had previously held a 25-year lease on the land, which had expired.

The state further stated that, around October 13, 2023, it had instructed staff of the Enugu Capital Territory Development Authority to serve removal notices on buildings affected by the proposed project, including OSISATECH.

The court is expected to consider the competing positions as the case proceeds.

Bank’s Headquarters Demolished After 72-Hour Notice

The demolition took place on May 15, 2024, and affected the bank’s corporate headquarters at No. 1, Ogui Road, Enugu.

According to the court documents, the bank was given only 72 hours to vacate the premises in a notice issued on May 12, 2024.

The demolition reportedly destroyed two bank safes valued at ₦15m, alongside other property belonging to the financial institution.

Ohha Microfinance Bank said the incident resulted in significant losses to an investment it had developed over more than 27 years.

The dispute also concerns the destruction of properties belonging to hundreds of other businesses, with the affected assets reportedly worth several hundreds of millions of naira.

The bank maintains that it was not paid prompt and adequate compensation for the destruction of its investment.

Ohha Microfinance Seeks ₦20.4bn in Damages

The bank filed the suit on January 20, 2025, seeking a declaration that the demolition of its properties without prompt and adequate compensation was illegal, unconstitutional, null and void.

Its claims cite Sections 43 and 44(1) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as well as Articles 22 and 23 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

The plaintiff is seeking special damages of ₦420,194,500 for its losses, alongside ₦20bn in aggravated, punitive and general damages.

It is also requesting interest at 18 per cent per annum on the special damages from May 15, 2024, until judgment is delivered.

Additionally, the bank is seeking 10 per cent annual interest on the judgment sum until the amount awarded is fully paid.

The bank argued that the government’s actions were inconsistent with its public commitment to creating an investor-friendly environment, alleging that it had repeatedly refused to compensate the financial institution for the destruction of its investment.

Case Adjourned Until December

The proceedings were stalled on Monday because the trial judge was absent.

The court subsequently adjourned the matter until December 7, 2026, for the continuation of the trial.

The case remains pending, and the claims made by the bank and the state government’s responses are yet to be finally determined by the court.