Hearing has commenced in the case between Reverend John Joseph Hayab and the Federal Government of Nigeria at the Court of Economic Community of West Africa States, ECOWAS, last Friday 28 February, 2025.
Reverend John Joseph Hayab had dragged the Federal Government of Nigeria to the ECOWAS court in October 2023 following the previous Kaduna state Nasir Ahmad Elrufai’s led government’s order to demolish the only church where Christian students worship at the main campus of the Kaduna State University.
The adminstration also sought to forcefully confiscate the Chapel of Goodnews which shares a fence with the Kaduna State University and has its separate ownership .
In the the suit, Counsel to the Applicant Barrister Gloria Mabeiam Ballason argued that the right to freedom of religion and equal treatment before the Law is enshrined in the African Charter and the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
She further argued that the decision by the Nigerian Court to not so much as arraign Ismail Umaru Dikko, the agent of state who personally led joint armed security agents to demolish the chapel and harassed and manhandled the leaders of the church and workers at the site meant that the Court shut its door against the litigant, put the state government above the Law and swept her client beneath the law.
She further argued that Kaduna State University is a separate and distinct entity from Chapel of Goodnews and is owned by two separate entities.
Barrister Ballason stated that Kaduna State is under the governing powers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria which is the defendant and the constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria is supreme with a binding force on the authorities and persons in the country as stipulated in Section 1(1) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria ,adding that the proper party to sue in the case is the Defendant as provided by the rules of the ECOWAS Court.
In the suit, the Applicant mentioned that the Respondent has violated the rights and there is need for effective remedies including examplary damages that would forestall the rights to freedom of religion which is contained in Nigeria’s municipal laws, regional laws and international law the subject matter being the fundamental rights to religious freedom which comes from the dignity of the human being as God’s creation.
The Counsel therefore urged the Court to dismiss the defendants’ statement and prayed the court to protect and enforce the rights of the applicant in the interest of justice.
Defense counsel Barrister I.I. Hassan urged the ECOWAS Court to dismiss the case on grounds of abuse of court processes and lack of merit, stating that the applicant did not exhaust local remedies as such the application amounted to forum shopping.
However, Counsel to the Applicant Barrister Gloria Mabeiam Ballason asserted that the universal principle of law is that where there is injury, there must be a remedy and since the Nigerian Court shut its doors, the regional court was available for remedies moreso as exhaustion of local remedies was no longer a condition precedent for an application at the regional court.
The panel of three Justices heard the application and reserved the matter for judgement.
Virtual Monitor/Shindong Bala
