The Federal High Court in Abuja, on Monday, barred Prof. Pat Utomi from going ahead with his “shadow government” in Nigeria.
Utomi had months ago commenced the establishment of a Shadow Government, which he said would be used to take the government into account.
Angered by the development, the Department of State Services, DSS, approached the court.
Justice James Omotosho, in a judgement delivered on Monday, declared the move as “unconstitutional and void.”
The ruling upheld the arguments of the DSS which stated that Utomi’s action may trigger unrest, saying it portends danger to the peace and security of Nigeria.
Justice Omotosho said there was no part of the Nigerian constitution that supports the formation of a shadow or parallel government.
Citing Section 1(1) and (2) of the 1999 Constitution, the judge said the constitution is supreme and binding on all citizens irrespective of political divides.
The judge held that Utomi and his associates cannot hide under the rights of association and to criticise the government to engage in unlawful activities.
He commended the plaintiff for filing the suit and held among others, that it was within the right of the DSS to take steps to prevent acts capable today threatening the nation's internal security.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/937/2025, was instituted by the DSS, which had argued that Utomi’s initiative was unconstitutional and posed a threat to national security.
The security agency asked the court to declare the move illegal, describing it as a parallel authority not recognised by the 1999 Constitution.
The DSS contended that the proposed shadow structure, if allowed, could incite unrest, embolden separatist groups and destabilise the country’s democratic system.
It therefore sought a perpetual injunction restraining Utomi, his agents and associates from pursuing the project.
In the final address of DSS dated July 10, DSS counsel, Akinlolu Kehinde (SAN), had maintained that Utomi lacked constitutional authority to establish any such government, likening the plan to early warning signs of insurgent groups.
“We know how Boko Haram started, and even IPOB. We must not wait for crisis to happen before we act,” he argued.
However, Utomi’s lawyer, Mike Ozekhome (SAN), had countered that the initiative was not a parallel authority but a civic action designed to scrutinise government policies and proffer solutions.
He insisted that branding it as subversive amounted to gagging Nigerians.
“They are trying to chain Nigerians with shackles stronger than those that dehumanised slaves over 500 years ago,” Ozekhome told the court.
He had argued that the group neither has an executive, legislature nor judiciary, but is a coalition of like-minded citizens and urged the court to dismiss the suit as an attempt to criminalise dissent.
