The Court of Appeal in Abuja has upheld the nullification of several provisions of the Companies and Allied Matters Act 2020 that gave the Corporate Affairs Commission powers over incorporated trustees, including religious organisations and other voluntary associations.

A three-member panel of the appellate court unanimously held that Sections 839, 842, 843, 844, 845, 846, 847 and 848 of CAMA infringed constitutionally protected rights to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom of association and peaceful assembly.

The judgment was delivered on September 17, 2026, by Justice Donatus Okorowo, with Justices Abba Mohammed and Eberechi Nyesom-Wike concurring.

The case followed a legal challenge brought by Emmanuel Ekpenyong, a lawyer and member of a registered religious association, against the National Assembly, the CAC and the Attorney-General of the Federation.

Ekpenyong had challenged provisions of CAMA that he argued violated his fundamental rights under Sections 38 and 40 of the 1999 Constitution.

Dispute over CAC powers

One of the central provisions in the case was Section 839, which gave the CAC powers, under specified circumstances, to suspend trustees of an association and appoint interim managers to oversee its affairs.

The provision became controversial because incorporated trustees cover a wide range of organisations, including churches, mosques, charities, NGOs and other associations.

Religious organisations and civil society groups had raised concerns that the provision could give the government excessive influence over the internal management of such organisations.

The Christian Association of Nigeria had previously called for amendments to the law, while the CAC maintained that it would not arbitrarily suspend trustees and that its decisions remained subject to judicial review.

Ekpenyong instituted the case at the Federal High Court in Abuja on August 31, 2020.

In April 2023, Justice James Omotosho ruled in his favour and declared Sections 839 to 848 unconstitutional, null and void.

The Federal High Court held that the powers granted to the CAC to regulate and administer incorporated trustees under those provisions interfered with constitutionally protected rights.

The court also ruled on Section 851, which empowers the Administrative Proceedings Committee to determine matters arising under CAMA. Justice Omotosho held that the provision was inconsistent with the constitutional jurisdiction of the Federal High Court.

CAC challenges Federal High Court ruling

The CAC appealed the decision, arguing, among other things, that the Federal High Court should not have assumed jurisdiction over Ekpenyong’s fundamental rights case.

The commission also challenged Ekpenyong’s legal standing to institute the action.

The Court of Appeal, however, rejected that argument and affirmed that Ekpenyong had standing to challenge the provisions based on his personal interest and membership of a registered religious association.

Justice Okorowo, who delivered the appellate judgment, held that voluntary associations generally have authority over the management of their internal affairs, subject to their own constitutions.

The court found that the disputed CAMA provisions interfered with constitutional freedoms protected under Sections 38 and 40 of the Constitution.

It also rejected the argument that the restrictions could be justified under Section 45(1) of the Constitution.

The Court of Appeal consequently affirmed the Federal High Court’s decision striking down Sections 839, 842, 843, 844, 845, 846, 847 and 848 of CAMA.

Court modifies ruling on Section 851

The appellate court, however, did not uphold the Federal High Court’s wholesale nullification of Section 851.

Section 851 establishes the Administrative Proceedings Committee and provides for its role in dealing with matters arising under CAMA.

The Court of Appeal held that the provision was unconstitutional only to the extent that it gave the committee the power to determine justiciable disputes at first instance, to the exclusion of the Federal High Court, and to impose penalties in the manner of a court.

The court preserved the committee’s remaining administrative and regulatory functions, subject to the supervisory jurisdiction of the Federal High Court.

The appellate court therefore modified the Federal High Court’s decision concerning Section 851 while affirming the nullification of Sections 839 and 842 to 848.

It consequently dismissed the CAC’s appeal in substantial part, with each party ordered to bear its own costs.

What the ruling means for incorporated trustees

The decision places constitutional limits on specific powers that the CAC can exercise over incorporated trustees.

However, the ruling does not mean that incorporated trustees, churches, charities, NGOs or other voluntary organisations are completely outside the CAC’s regulatory framework.

The Court of Appeal specifically preserved the administrative and regulatory functions of the Administrative Proceedings Committee under Section 851, subject to the jurisdiction and supervision of the Federal High Court.

The ruling therefore distinguishes between legitimate administrative regulation and powers that the court found would interfere with constitutionally protected freedoms.

The case also remains capable of further legal proceedings because the Court of Appeal is not Nigeria’s final court. Any further appeal to the Supreme Court could determine the final position on the constitutional questions raised by the dispute.

The post Appeal Court Restricts CAC Powers Over Religious, Voluntary Organisations appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

Justice of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, has issued a final directive to the (EFCC) to produce its witness against former Central Bank governor by the next adjourned date or face closure of the case.

The court imposed a fine of N500,000 on EFCC for failing to produce Deputy Commissioner of Police, DCP Elohor Edwin Okpoziakeo, a key investigator in the alleged procurement fraud case, citing repeated delays despite an accelerated trial order.

Case details and charges

Emefiele is facing a 20-count charge brought by EFCC on behalf of the Federal Government, including allegations of criminal breach of trust, forgery, abuse of office, and obtaining money by false pretence. He allegedly secured $6.23 million intended for international election observers during the 2023 general election and conferred corrupt advantages on two companies—April 1616 Nigeria Ltd and Architekon Nigeria Ltd.

Court stance on adjournments

EFCC had sought another adjournment, citing administrative procedures preventing the witness from attending. The defence counsel, Matthew Burkaa, SAN, opposed this, stating that the agency had already been granted eight adjournments—three more than the maximum allowed under the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015.

Justice Muazu acknowledged the discretion courts have to grant adjournments in the interest of justice but emphasized the need for accountability and penalized EFCC for unnecessary delays.

Next steps

The court adjourned the trial to April 27 and 28 for continuation, emphasizing that the witness must be present, failing which the court may take further action in line with the law.

The post EFCC Ordered to Produce Witness or Face Closure in Emefiele Trial appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

A High Court in the Federal Capital Territory has fined the (EFCC) N500,000 for repeatedly seeking adjournments in the ongoing trial of former Central Bank governor, .

Justice of the FCT High Court, sitting in Maitama, Abuja, imposed the fine on Tuesday after the anti-graft agency requested another adjournment due to the absence of its witness.

The judge, however, granted what he described as a final adjournment to allow the prosecution present its witness in court.

Emefiele faces multiple charges

Emefiele is being prosecuted on a 20-count charge bordering on alleged procurement fraud, criminal breach of trust, forgery, abuse of office, and obtaining money under false pretence.

He is accused of allegedly securing over $6.2 million meant for international election observers during the 2023 general elections, among other offences.

Defence opposes further adjournment

Counsel to the former CBN governor strongly opposed the application, arguing that the law limits the number of adjournments allowed in criminal trials.

The defence maintained that the prosecution had already exceeded the permitted number of adjournments and failed to adequately prepare its witness over a prolonged period.

Court cites interest of justice

In his ruling, Justice Muazu acknowledged the legal limits on adjournments but stated that the court retains discretion to grant one if it serves the interest of justice.

However, he sanctioned the EFCC for delaying proceedings despite earlier approval for accelerated hearing.

Next hearing date fixed

The court subsequently adjourned the case to April 27 and 28 for continuation of trial proceedings.

EFCC news, Godwin Emefiele trial, court fine Nigeria, procurement fraud case, FCT High Court, anti-corruption Nigeria, legal news Nigeria

The post Court Fines EFCC N500,000 Over Delays in Emefiele Trial appeared first on Housing TV Africa.