In a significant development in an ongoing legal battle, the Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed September 29, 2025, as the date to hear a motion filed by the Osun State Government. The motion challenges the jurisdiction of the Abuja division of the Federal High Court to adjudicate a lawsuit concerning the withholding of Local Government funds, a matter that has sparked considerable legal and political debate. The decision to set this date was announced by Justice Emeka Nwite, who presided over the proceedings, following extensive submissions from all parties involved in the case. The hearing promises to be a pivotal moment in determining whether the case will remain in Abuja or be returned to the Osogbo division of the Federal High Court, where it was originally filed.
Background of the Case
The case at the heart of this legal dispute revolves around the Osun State Government’s efforts to block the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the Accountant-General of the Federation (AGF) from releasing statutory allocations to local government chairmen and councilors elected under the All Progressives Congress (APC) in 2022. The state government contends that these elected officials were sacked by a prior Federal High Court ruling, a decision that was subsequently upheld by the Court of Appeal. The Osun State Government, represented by its Attorney-General, Mr. Oluwole Jimi-Bada, initiated the lawsuit in the Osogbo division of the Federal High Court. The suit seeks to prevent the CBN and the AGF from disbursing funds to the allegedly sacked officials and also requests an order to prohibit the defendants from opening or operating any accounts for these local government officials.
The case took a notable turn when it was transferred to the Abuja division during the Federal High Court’s vacation period, under the authority of a fiat issued by the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court. However, with the vacation period concluding on September 16, 2025, the Osun State Government has raised objections to the case remaining in Abuja, arguing that the matter should revert to the Osogbo division, where it was originally filed.
The Motion Challenging Jurisdiction
During the court session, Chief Musibau Adetunbi (SAN), the lead counsel for the Osun State Government, presented a robust argument challenging the jurisdiction of the Abuja division to continue hearing the case. Adetunbi contended that the fiat issued by the Chief Judge, which allowed the case to be transferred to Abuja during the court’s vacation, had expired upon the conclusion of the vacation period on September 16, 2025. He argued that, in the absence of a valid fiat, the case should be returned to the Osogbo division, where it was initially lodged. Adetunbi emphasized that continuing the proceedings in Abuja would be procedurally improper and could undermine the integrity of the judicial process.
In a pointed critique, Adetunbi also questioned the legitimacy of a letter purportedly authorizing Justice Emeka Nwite to retain the case in Abuja. He described the letter as lacking legal validity, asserting that it was signed by an individual with no recognized authority to issue such a directive. In a striking characterization, Adetunbi referred to the signatory as a “busybody unknown to the law,” a term that underscored his argument that the letter was devoid of legal weight and could not justify the retention of the case in Abuja. This bold assertion added a layer of contention to the proceedings, as it called into question the administrative processes that led to the case’s transfer.
Defense Arguments and Concerns
The defense, represented by Dr. Muritala Abdulrasheed (SAN) for the Central Bank of Nigeria and Mr. Tajudeen Oladoja (SAN) for the Accountant-General of the Federation, strongly opposed the Osun State Government’s motion. They dismissed the jurisdictional challenge as a calculated attempt to delay the resolution of the case. The defense lawyers argued that the motion was a tactical maneuver aimed at stalling proceedings, which could have significant implications for the elected APC chairmen and councilors in Osun State.
The defense highlighted the urgency of resolving the case, pointing out that the tenure of the elected local government officials is set to expire on October 22, 2025. They warned that any further delays in the judicial process could render the lawsuit academic, as the expiration of the officials’ tenure would moot the issue of whether funds should be released to them. This time-sensitive argument was presented as a counterpoint to the plaintiff’s jurisdictional challenge, with the defense urging the court to prioritize a swift resolution to ensure that the substantive issues in the case are addressed before they become irrelevant.
Striking Out the AGF as a Defendant
In a procedural development during the court session, the Federal High Court struck out the name of the Attorney-General of the Federation as the third defendant in the lawsuit. This decision followed a request by the Osun State Government to withdraw its claims against the AGF. Chief Musibau Adetunbi explained that the state government had decided to drop the AGF from the case because a related matter involving the AGF is already pending before the Supreme Court. This strategic withdrawal streamlined the lawsuit, leaving the CBN and other defendants as the primary parties against whom the Osun State Government is seeking relief.
Legal and Political Implications
The dispute over the withheld Local Government funds in Osun State is emblematic of broader tensions between state and local governments in Nigeria, particularly regarding the control and allocation of financial resources. The Osun State Government’s legal action reflects its determination to enforce a prior court ruling that sacked the APC-elected local government officials. By seeking to block the release of statutory allocations to these officials, the state government is asserting its authority to regulate local governance and financial disbursements in line with judicial decisions.
The jurisdictional challenge raised by the Osun State Government also underscores the complexities of Nigeria’s federal judicial system, where cases can be transferred between divisions based on administrative directives, such as the Chief Judge’s fiat. The plaintiff’s argument that the case should return to Osogbo highlights the importance of procedural propriety and the potential for disputes over venue to influence the trajectory of a case. The defense’s contention that the motion is a delay tactic further illustrates the strategic maneuvering often involved in high-stakes litigation, particularly when political interests are at play.
The impending expiration of the APC officials’ tenure on October 22, 2025, adds a layer of urgency to the case. If the court fails to resolve the jurisdictional and substantive issues before this deadline, the lawsuit could lose its practical significance, as the question of funding for the sacked officials would become moot. This temporal constraint places pressure on the Federal High Court to act decisively, balancing the need for procedural fairness with the imperative to deliver timely justice.
The Role of the Federal High Court
The Federal High Court, as a key institution in Nigeria’s judicial system, is tasked with adjudicating disputes involving federal and state entities, including matters related to financial allocations and governance. Justice Emeka Nwite’s role in presiding over this case places him at the center of a contentious legal battle with far-reaching implications for Osun State’s political landscape. His decision to schedule the hearing for September 29, 2025, reflects a careful approach to addressing the jurisdictional motion while ensuring that the case progresses toward a resolution.
The court’s handling of the case will likely set a precedent for how similar disputes are managed in the future, particularly those involving conflicts between state governments and local officials over financial resources. The outcome of the jurisdictional motion will determine whether the case remains in Abuja, where it may benefit from the centralized resources of the Federal High Court’s headquarters, or returns to Osogbo, where the dispute is geographically rooted.
Broader Context: Local Government Autonomy in Nigeria
The Osun State case is part of a larger national conversation about local government autonomy in Nigeria. In recent years, there has been significant debate over the extent to which local governments should have control over their finances and operations, independent of state governments. The Federal High Court’s earlier ruling, which sacked the APC-elected officials in Osun, and the subsequent affirmation by the Court of Appeal, reflect the judiciary’s role in mediating disputes between state and local authorities.
The Osun State Government’s efforts to block funding to the sacked officials align with its position that these individuals no longer have legal standing to receive statutory allocations. However, the defense’s argument that delays could undermine the case’s relevance highlights the practical challenges of implementing judicial decisions in a politically charged environment. The interplay between legal rulings, administrative actions, and political realities underscores the complexity of governance in Nigeria’s federal system.
What to Expect on September 29, 2025
The hearing scheduled for September 29, 2025, will focus on the Osun State Government’s motion challenging the Abuja division’s jurisdiction. Justice Emeka Nwite will hear arguments from both sides, with the plaintiff likely reiterating its position that the case should return to Osogbo due to the expiration of the Chief Judge’s fiat. The defense, on the other hand, will likely press for the case to remain in Abuja, emphasizing the need for a swift resolution to avoid rendering the lawsuit academic.
The court’s ruling on the jurisdictional motion will have significant implications for the trajectory of the case. If the motion is granted, the case will be transferred back to Osogbo, potentially delaying proceedings as the matter is reassigned to a new judge. If the motion is denied, the case will continue in Abuja, allowing for a more expedited resolution but raising questions about the propriety of the transfer process.
Conclusion
The Federal High Court’s decision to schedule a hearing for September 29, 2025, marks a critical juncture in the Osun State Government’s legal challenge against the release of Local Government funds to APC-elected officials. The jurisdictional dispute, centered on the validity of the case’s transfer to Abuja, highlights the intricate interplay between procedural rules, judicial authority, and political dynamics. As the hearing date approaches, all eyes will be on Justice Emeka Nwite and the Federal High Court to deliver a ruling that balances legal principles with the practical realities of governance in Osun State. The outcome of this case could have lasting implications for local government autonomy, judicial administration, and the distribution of financial resources in Nigeria’s federal system.